POTUS Eligibility: Georgia Judge Will Hear Challenges for Obama to Be Put on State’s Primary Election Ballot, Despite Team Obama’s Attempts to Squash
Posted By Vicki McClure Davidson on January 6, 2012
Georgia judge will hear evidence about Obama's eligibility to be on state's primary ballot
This upcoming hearing in Georgia is not about Barack Obama’s controversial birth certificate nor his place of birth. It has to do with his father’s citizenship and the interpretation of the state of Georgia’s election code in this case of Farrar v. Obama (Ga. Office of State Admin. Hearings Jan. 3, 2012) filed this week.
A hearing will be conducted in Fulton County on January 26.
Extra butter on that popcorn, please…
From Examiner, Obama eligibility challenges to move forward in Georgia:
ATLANTA – On Jan. 3, 2012, Georgia Administrative Law Judge Michael M. Malihi, who consolidated several cases challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be placed on the primary ballot in Georgia, issued an order denying Obama’s motion to dismiss those challenges.
In a footnote, Malihi stated, “Because defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied, in the interest of efficiency, the court finds it unnecessary to wait for plaintiffs’ responses before denying the motion.”
Shortly after his visit to Phoenix where he addressed the Arizona 2012 Project, Attorney Van Irion of the Liberty Legal Foundation filed a challenge in the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings on behalf of Plaintiff David Welden, challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be placed on the state’s primary election ballot.
[...]
Irion, in possibly the only objection already filed to Obama’s motion to dismiss, stated, “Contrary to the defendant’s assertions, the issue presented by the plaintiff is grounded on one uncontestable fact and one clear definition from the U.S. Supreme Court,” and cited Minor v. Happersett.
He went on to say, “It is undisputed that President Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. To plaintiff’s knowledge Mr. Obama has never denied the fact that his father was not a U.S. citizen, nor has he ever made any statements contrary to this fact.
“The U.S. Supreme Court has defined ‘natural-born citizens’ as ‘all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens.’”
While the Happersett court went on to state that there were other sub-categories of people who may or may not fit within the broader term “citizen,” Irion pointed out it did so only after specifically identifying the narrower category “natural-born citizen.”
Irion argued, “Because it is undisputed that Mr. Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, the defendant can never be a natural-born citizen, as that term was defined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Therefore, the defendant cannot meet the constitutional requirements to hold the office of President.”
Georgia Election Code states: “Every candidate for federal and state office … shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”
Despite the clear language of the code, Obama claimed, in his motion to dismiss, the law doesn’t apply to presidential primaries.
Irion called that argument “absurd” and stated, “If the state of Georgia intended presidential primaries to not be considered elections it would not codify the administration of such primaries within Title 21 of Georgia’s codes, entitled ‘Election Code.’”
From Ledger-Enquirer, Georgia judge to hear arguments on eligibility of Barack Obama on ballot; Orly Taitz hails decision:
“Birther” attorney Orly Taitz, a national leader among those who claim President Barack Obama isn’t an American citizen, is hailing a Tuesday decision by a Georgia judge as a victory in her movement.
Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi in the Office of State Administrative Hearings denied a motion by Obama asking to dismiss the complaint that seeks to keep his name off the state ballot during the March presidential primary. The judge’s decision now sets the stage for a Jan. 26 hearing on the issue in Fulton County.
Obama is not required to attend the hearing, a court official said.
Initially filed in November by Taitz on behalf of a Georgia resident, the complaint argues that Obama isn’t a natural born citizen and is ineligible from being president.
“He does not satisfy the ‘natural born citizen’ constitutional requirement for President to be on the ballot due to his foreign citizenship and allegiance to three other nations,” the documents state.
On her blog, Taitz lauded the judge’s ruling, claiming she could now depose Obama.
“I can now depose Obama and everybody else (i)nvolved without any impediment,” the California attorney posted on her website.
She also noted that the victory came in Georgia, where she has suffered numerous setbacks in her attempts to prove the president was not born in the United States.
Eugene Volokh at Opposing Views weighs in… Georgia Judge: OK to Challenge Obama’s Legitimacy on Ballot:
A Georgia statute expressly allows any eligible elector to challenge any candidate’s qualifications, and that’s what the plaintiffs are doing.
Similar challenges have generally been rejected on procedural grounds, such as on the grounds that plaintiffs lack standing to sue because they have no greater stake in the matter than any other citizen. Generally speaking, federal courts have concluded that in such cases where the plaintiff doesn’t have a particularized stake in the matter, the resolution even of constitutional controversies should be left to the political process and not to courts.
But because this is filed under state law, state standing law governs, and many states do not impose the same standing requirements as federal courts do. So the judge in this case denied the President’s motion to dismiss. (You can read for yourself the President’s motion to dismiss, and the plaintiffs’ response.)
My view, though not as one who is an expert on the subject, is that the plaintiffs’ legal claims are not sound as a matter of the merits. First, “natural-born citizen” means, roughly, “citizen at birth”; citizens come in two kinds, natural-born and naturalized. Second, when the Fourteenth Amendment provides that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,” that means that all persons born in the United States are natural-born citizens.
But it will be interesting to see to see what the Georgia legal system does with this. As best I can tell from a quick glance of the statute, the administrative law judge is supposed to make findings and report them to the Georgia Secretary of State; the Georgia Secretary of State will then make the decision, which can then be appealed to Georgia trial court and then from there on up through the Georgia appellate system.
Billboard of 'Where's the birth certificate?' erected at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas, Nevada
About the author
Comments