Obama birth certificate court date

Once in a great while, though, typically when the potential stakes are very high, that scrutiny can be very public, very uncomfortable, and not always completely conclusive. The authenticity and trustworthiness of these documents is partially a matter of look and feel—you expect higher-quality paper, professional looking printing, maybe chips or holograms or other physical devices. All of which can be forged or faked with various levels of difficulty. It also comes from the chain of people and processes by which a document produced and maintained; the more secure those are, the better you feel.

It is what it says, a certification of the circumstances of the birth of a baby. It allows people to prove parentage, inheritance rights, and citizenship, apply to drive, vote, get a passport or Social Security. It also has to be right. And if the child is born on a moving conveyance, register them as if the birth occurred in the place where they were first removed from the conveyance. Much of this is to assist the compilation of vital statistics, which are of great use to demographers, planners, researchers, public health officials and the like.

A number of kinds of legal documents are becoming natively digital. Many court systems, for example, encourage or require digital submission of filings, and electronic signatures are increasingly commonplace.

Lots of other familiar printed forms—newspapers, magazines, ,checks, have already ventured down that road. Some documents, though, seem to have a more personal or legal connection, like a will or a mortgage, or seem somehow more important. For those, it feels better, more secure, to have something tangible to hold on to, so digital versions of those seem less likely to be embraced quickly. It could be, then, that this first and most basic document we get will be one of the last pieces of paper that future generations have.

Todd B. Congressional Research Service. Numerous lawsuits and ballot challenges, based on conspiracy theories related to Barack Obama 's eligibility for the United States presidency, have been filed since These actions have sought to have Obama disqualified from running for, or being confirmed for, the Presidency of the United States , to declare his actions in office to be null and void, or to compel him to release additional documentation related to his U.

By early , dozens of lawsuits had been filed challenging Obama's eligibility in states including North Carolina, [1] Ohio, [2] Pennsylvania, [3] Hawaii, [4] Connecticut, [5] New Jersey, Texas and Washington. A major obstacle to most citizen suits has been lack of standing.

In the initial wave of lawsuits challenging the validity of the presidential election , the only plaintiff who was a presidential candidate or presidential elector was Alan Keyes. The importance of the doctrine of standing was explained by Judge R. He noted that one of the principal aims of the doctrine is to prevent courts from deciding questions "where the harm is too vague. On April 27, , Obama released his original Hawaii long-form birth certificate. On August 21, , Pennsylvania attorney Philip J. Berg , a Democrat [10] and former deputy state attorney general, filed a complaint alleging that Obama was born in Kenya , not Hawaii, and was therefore a citizen of Kenya or possibly Indonesia, where he lived as a child.

District Judge R. Barclay Surrick dismissed the complaint in October , finding that Berg lacked standing to bring the case and that his attempts to gain standing to pursue his claim were "frivolous and not worthy of discussion.

Introduction

On December 10, , the Supreme Court denied Berg's request for an injunction against the seating of the Electoral College, scheduled for December The application for stay addressed to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court was also summarily denied on January 21, The suit was originally filed as a Freedom of Information Act case, but was amended to a judicial challenge to Obama's qualifications for the Office of President of the United States. Essek sought to prevent the inauguration of Barack Obama on the grounds that Obama was not a natural born citizen based on allegations that Obama was born in Kenya.

Van Tatenhove dismissed the suit because of a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, stating that Mr. Essek's grievance was the generalized grievance of a voter, not a specific injury that would have granted him standing to sue.

• Obama birth certificate lawsuits - Conservapedia?
• marriage record for tammy gray wilmore ks!
• austin texas white pages phone book!
• Kansas Republicans: We need to see Obama's birth certificate;
• Sheriff Joe Arpaio renews birther claims about Obama's birth certificate?
• Navigation menu!
• The birth of the Obama 'birther' conspiracy - BBC News?

Obama, affirmed the dismissal, and ordered Apuzzo to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for initiating a frivolous appeal. Supreme Court declined, without comment, to hear the case. Barack H. Obama et al against Obama, with Wiley Drake as one of the named parties for the plaintiff. Taitz sought a declaratory judgment that Obama is ineligible for office and an injunction to void his actions and appointments as President.

Two of the plaintiffs, Markham Robinson and Drake, subsequently attempted to dismiss their attorney, Orly Taitz, who refused to sign their substitution-of-attorney documents and instead filed to dismiss the two of them as plaintiffs in the case. On September 8, , Judge David O.

Carter denied the dismissal of Drake and Robinson as plaintiffs, and granted their motion to substitute Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation as counsel for them, refused to dismiss Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato from the case, and set a tentative trial date for January 26, At a hearing on October 5, , Carter considered the defendants' Motion to Dismiss and declined to rule from the bench, saying that he would take the matter under advisement.

You are here

Citing new evidence, on August 14, , Taitz filed a motion in Judge Carter's court to re-open the case. Hollister, a retired Air Force colonel, against Barack Obama referenced as "Barry Soetoro", the name given at the time of his enrollment in an Indonesian elementary school. The presiding judge, James Robertson , said the case was a waste of the court's time, calling Berg and another lawyer "agents provocateurs" and their local counsel, John Hemenway, "a foot soldier in their crusade.

On February 1, , Stefan F. Cook, a major in the United States Army Reserve , contacted Taitz via e-mail, asking to be part of her lawsuit. On May 8, he volunteered to serve for one year in Afghanistan beginning on July 15, In the lawsuit, captioned Stefan Frederick Cook v. Wanda L. Good Colonel Wanda L. Good -Commander, U. Army Human Resources Command — St. Louis and filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia , Cook asserted that he "would be acting in violation of international law by engaging in military actions outside the United States under this President's command.

Special Operations Central Command has determined that he does not want the services of Major Cook, and has revoked his deployment orders. Cook or his attorney. The idea that this validates those charges about the president's fitness for office is simply false. After the case was filed, Taitz alleged that Cook had been terminated from his civilian job with a defense contractor, after the situation at his company had become "nutty and crazy".

After the lawsuit was reported in the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer , the newspaper reported receiving "the highest volume of traffic ever by a single story in the history of ledger-enquirer. The threats prompted an increase in security around the courthouse where Cook's case was heard, as well as precautions being taken to protect the author of the newspaper's reports on the case. In September , Taitz filed Rhodes v. Army physician, sought a restraining order to stop Rhodes' forthcoming deployment to Iraq. In the request for a restraining order, Taitz argued the order was illegal since Obama was illegally serving as President.

On September 16, federal judge Clay D. Land the same judge who heard Cook v. Good rejected the motion and denounced it as frivolous. Within hours of Land's decision, Taitz told the news site Talking Points Memo that she felt Land's refusal to hear her case was an act of treason.

She repeated her treason allegations against Land and made several other intemperate statements, including claims that Land was aiding and abetting purported aspirations of "dictatorship" by Obama. A few hours later, a letter bearing Rhodes's signature arrived, stating that Taitz filed the motion without her knowledge or consent, asking Land to remove Taitz as her attorney of record in the case, and stating that it was her "plan to file a complaint with the California State Bar due to [Taitz's] reprehensible and unprofessional actions.

The Court finds that counsel's conduct was willful and not merely negligent. It demonstrates bad faith on her part. As an attorney, she is deemed to have known better.

She owed a duty to follow the rules and to respect the Court. Counsel's pattern of conduct conclusively establishes that she did not mistakenly violate a provision of law. She knowingly violated Rule Her response to the Court's show cause order is breathtaking in its arrogance and borders on delusional. She expresses no contrition or regret regarding her misconduct. To the contrary, she continues her baseless attacks on the Court.

Upon learning of Land's ruling, Taitz said she would appeal the sanction, declaring that Judge Land was "scared to go against the regime" of the "oppressive" Obama administration, and that the sanction was an attempt to "intimidate" her. On January 27, , Taitz, in propria persona , filed a petition for writ of quo warranto. On April 14, , U. Lamberth dismissed the petition; and, alluding to the novel Don Quixote , he wrote, "The Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.

In February , Taitz filed, in propria persona , a Freedom of Information Act suit against the Social Security Administration , alleging the agency improperly refused to disclose to her information about Obama's social security number.