Will Supreme Court take case on Obama's citizenship?

[Docfeelgood]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


No.

That was the lie propagated by right wing websites.

How do you know it is not the other way around?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Docfeelgood
How do you know it is not the other way around?

You're the one who posted his birth certificate. Figure it out.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by MrFun
Hey all McCain voters . . .


you lost the election. So how much time should we give you for you to get over it?

This case has nothing to do with McCain, rightwing bloggers, or whatever other trite kneejerk reactions you might have. It is about a lifelong Democrat, paying member of the NAACP, former Deputy Attorney General for a Democratic administration, and candidate in several state Democratic primaries, who has admitted that it pains him to be subjecting a Democrat to this scrutiny, and is merely trying to ensure enforcement of the Constitution for its own sake. It's not his fault that a bunch of right-wing nutcases happen to support him, any more than it was Obama's fault that Farrakhan wanted him to win.

And again, I can't stress enough that this case is more about the voters' standing to enforce a constitutional provision than it is about the facts of the individual case. The standing issue alone has very serious implications worthy of the court's attention, regardless of whether the factual case is DOA.

[Docfeelgood]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


You're the one who posted his birth certificate. Figure it out.

I am trying to figure it out.

like kool-aid?

[Boris Godunov]

GAAAAAAR my eyes broke!!!!!

[Darius871]

BTW, I've read through most of his petition and it does actually have some strong legal arguments on standing, particularly given that this issue is novel. This one precedential snippet might tip the scales in favor of at least hearing the case:

More recently, in
Akins, this Court rendered a decision maintaining
that individual voters’ inability to obtain alleged
public information met the injury in fact
requirement, as it helped to ensure that the Court
will adjudicate “a concrete, living contest between
adversaries.” 524 U.S. at 21.

http://www.obamacrimes.com/attachments/057_1%20US%20Supreme%20Court%20Writ%20of%20Certiorari%2010_30_08.pdf

[Docfeelgood]

Cyber bullies

[Boris Godunov]

Even if the plaintiffs have standing to bring suit, that doesn't remotely require SCOTUS to hear it. They frequently decide not to hear cases that are, to them, obviously without merit, as this one is.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Docfeelgood
I thought his birth name was Barry?

So what? This document was made recently as a certification from Hawaii. They wrote it they way he asked. (Not even sure if it's needed to put old name down there...or if supposed to have current legal name).

It's not from when he was born. see the bottom lower for the "laser" reference.

[TCO]

The Illuminati youtube was not convincing.

[Docfeelgood]

Am I understanding that Hawaiian state law says that a foreign born child that is adopted in the USA can have an amended Hawaiian birth certificate?

http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/newbirthcert.html

BTW
still trying to figure it out.

[Boris Godunov]

If that were the case, they'd have the accompanying adoption records with the certificate.

Of course, why Obama would need to be adopted by his own natural birth parents is beyond me.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Even if the plaintiffs have standing to bring suit, that doesn't remotely require SCOTUS to hear it. They frequently decide not to hear cases that are, to them, obviously without merit, as this one is.

They also routinely hear cases limited to novel procedural issues or circuit splits that have absolutely nothing to do with the merits of an individual case. In fact the idiosyncracies of particular cases rarely are decisive their analysis for admission.

Also, I never said anything about what the SCOTUS is "required" to do, not sure where you got that from.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by TCO
The Illuminati youtube was not convincing.

Like I said, it was only for comedic value.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Yet your positing what amounts to an unconstitutional military coup...

No.

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
The SCOTUS has no power to enforce anything it decides, of course.

Of course. The executive branch enforces the rulings of the court. Were they to void Barry as Prez, they would (no "guarantee", but my assertion) do so here as well.

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
There's no guarantee public opinion would turn against him, either, depending on how it was handled. If he plead ignorance, saying he honestly had no idea this was the case and he'd been led to believe he was born in the U.S. yada yada yada, then there might be enough support to sustain him. He's got ~67% approval ratings right now.

Of course, there is no guarantee. I'm asserting likelihood. Are you asserting the opposite? Care to put money on it?