|
Supreme Court Should Review Our Georgia Eligibility Case
Later this month Liberty Legal Foundation will be filing its petition for the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Georgia Supreme Court’s ruling that Obama is a natural born citizen. As you know, Liberty Legal Foundation represented David Welden, one of the plaintiffs in the Georgia ballot challenges, earlier this year. Our efforts resulted in the first court ruling to reach the merits of an Article II challenge against Obama. All previous courts had dismissed such challenges on procedural grounds.
The Georgia Administrative Court and the Georgia Secretary of State both erroneously ruled that Obama is a natural born citizen because any person born on U.S. soil is, according to them, a natural born citizen. The Georgia Administrative Court was the first court to make such a ruling and have the authority to do so. Of course the ruling was wrong, but that is what we will be arguing to the Supreme Court.
In order to get there, we must show the Supreme Court that we have a case that allows the Court to reach the substantive issue. Please understand what I’m saying here because it is historic and critical to this entire eligibility fight. So, let me say it again: Never before had any court, anywhere in America, had authority to rule on whether Obama is an Article II natural born citizen, and actually made a ruling on the substance of that issue. Every other court had either dismissed on procedural grounds or ruled without authority to do so. This is why this issue has not previously reached the U.S. Supreme Court on the substance of the issue.
Many reading this will point to an Indiana Appellate Court decision from 2009, claiming that the Indiana Court had decided this issue.It is true that the Indiana state court ruled in Arkeny v. Governor that Obama was an Article II natural born citizen. In fact the Georgia Administrative Court relied on Arkeny, claiming that the Indiana Court had decided this issue. However, the Indiana Court’s own opinion admits that it didn’t have jurisdiction. Therefore the Arkeny Court had no authority to decide the Article II issue. The fact that it ruled on the issue, after admitting that it had no authority, simply proves that that court was yet another activist court full of judges willing to reach beyond the authority that we’ve given them.
You see, the Arkeny Court ruled that the plaintiff challenging Obama in Indiana didn’t have standing. When a plaintiff lacks standing, the court lacks jurisdiction. Which means that the court has no authority to decide the substantive issue of the case, even if it wants to do so. The Arkeny Court admitted that it lacked standing, and then it ruled on the substantive issue anyway. The judges in that case should be ashamed of themselves. Their ruling reflects either judicial activism at its worst, or inexcusable incompetence.
The reason the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to address the Obama Article II eligibility issue is because every case that has come to them so far reflected a lower court dismissing on procedural grounds, or a court ruling on the Article II issue when it had no authority to do so. In either case, the Supreme Court would not have been able to address the Article II issue, it would be forced to rule on the procedural issues or the lack of jurisdiction of the lower court. That is why Liberty Legal Foundation’s appeal from the Georgia courts is different.
David Welden, our plaintiff in the Georgia eligibility case, had clear standing because Georgia state law granted him standing. In fact, no defendant or court ever questioned our plaintiff’s standing to bring his case. So, the Georgia courts had jurisdiction to rule on the Article II issue. Because of that, Liberty Legal Foundation’s petition to the U.S. Supreme Court represents the first real opportunity for the Supreme Court to address the substance of whether Obama is an Article II natural born citizen. All previous cases were mired in procedural muck. Our Georgia case is a clean ruling on the substantive legal issue. If the Supreme Court is going to accept any case on Obama’s eligibility before the general election, it should be ours.
We need your help. Preparing our petition is labor intensive and expensive. If you are able, please donate $5, $10 or more today. Please also spread the word about Liberty Legal Foundation to your social networks, letters to editors, and community groups.
Thank you for standing with us for Liberty,
Van Irion, Founder
We need your help! Liberty Legal Foundation relies entirely on the support of our members to litigate our cases. Please donate what you can today to show your support for our work to restore the Constitution.
To donate by mail, make checks payable to “Liberty Legal Foundation” and mail to 9040 Executive Park Dr, Ste 200, Knoxville, TN 37923.
Please feel free to share, copy and/or reuse any of our legal filings or email communications. Our goal is to restore our Constitutional republic. If any of our written words can help do that by being republished elsewhere, then you are helping us achieve our mission!
Share This Newsletter
|
or 
Visit us on Twitter!
Visit us on Facebook!
A.K.A. Cert Denied.
Andy, 11 months ago
The Supreme Court Justices appointed by the usurper-in-chief, the fraud and forger Obama, must not participate in any legal deliberations on the matter of eligibility because their very appointments would necessarily have to be retroactively abrogated as illegal, that is to say conducted in the commission of a crime. Their’s is an enormous and evident conflict of interest.
Chris Farrell, 11 months ago
Agree.
- Sotomayer
- Kagan
… are illegal “Justices,” appointed by an illegal (p)Resident, breaking the law daily, enabled by lawbreakers, committing misprision of felony as they perpetrate it.
GeorgeM, 11 months ago
In his article ‘Statements Suggest Doubt About Obama Growing,’ wnd.com reporter Bob Unruh wrote, “Even Senate Resolution 511, passed in 2008 to declare that John McCain was a natural-born citizen, specified a natural-born citizen would have to be born of two U.S. parents.” “Among the sponsors of that statement was a junior senator named Obama. The resolution includes two references to “Americans” or “American Citizens” as parents.” The Supreme Court will not even extend the minimal amount of respect to the American People and insist that the two justices appointed by Obama recuse themselves from the decision making process. They will work hand in hand with the Republican/Democrat one party cabal that runs our government – our government which was at one time a ‘government of the People, by the People and for the People.’ They have the NDAA in place because they fear one day ‘We the People’ will take back our government. On this point they are right.
Chris Farrell, 11 months ago