In what can only be described as an unbelievable ruling, a Georgia judge has ruled Barack Obama can be on the ballot this year.
President Barack Obama’s name will remain on the Georgia primary ballot after a state law judge flatly rejected legal challenges that contend he can not be a candidate.
A Georgia judge rejected a "birther" challenge that claimed President Barack Obama was ineligible for the Georgia ballot.
In a 10-page order, Judge Michael Malihi dismissed one challenge
that contended Obama has a computer-generated Hawaiian birth
certificate, a fraudulent Social Security number and invalid U.S. identification papers. He
also turned back another that claimed the president is ineligible to be a candidate because
his father was not a U.S. citizen at the time of Obama's birth.
The findings by Malihi, a judge for the State Office of Administrative Hearings, go to Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who will make the final determination. Last month, at a hearing boycotted by Obama's lawyer, Malihi considered complaints brought by members of the so-called "birther" movement.
With regard to the challenge that Obama does not have legitimate birth and identification papers, Malihi said he found the evidence "unsatisfactory" and "insufficient to support plaintiffs' allegations."
A number of the witnesses who testified about the alleged fraud were never qualified as experts in birth records, forged documents and document manipulation and "none ... provided persuasive testimony," Malihi wrote.
Addressing the other claim that contends Obama cannot be a candidate because his father was never a U.S. citizen, Malihi said he was persuaded by a 2009 ruling by the Indiana Court of Appeals decision that struck down a similar challenge. In that ruling, the Indiana court found that children born within the U.S. are natural-born citizens, regardless of the citizenry of their parents.
Obama "became a citizen at birth and is a natural-born citizen," Malihi wrote. Accordingly, Obama is eligible as a candidate for the upcoming presidential primary in March, the judge said.
To call this ruling beyond belief would be an understatement. First, Obama and his legal team boycotted the proceedings. Unfortunately, the eligibility legal team might have made a strategic error in not simply accepting a default judgment.
According to the order that was issued, the Judge offered them that option but instead they insisted on a trial, which allowed the Judge to make certain rulings he would not have been able to make.
The ruling from the trial court is here. Hopefully it will be appealed and quickly, as the evidence in this case seems very strong.
Those dysfunctional Christian gun toting folks from the Mid-West who don't have much else to do but criticize the government since they are non-productive and have been unemployed for 25 years or more and simply their opinions don't matter because they are just out of touch. Personally, I would have any one of those gun toting Christians watch my back, before the Leader of the free world.
It's amazing that the majority of his supporters wouldn't know if he was criticizing them right to their faces, they just clap, because that's what they do when he speaks. DUUUUH!
Today I have written the following letter to Brian Kemp, Secretary of State of Georgia
The Honorable Secretary of State
State of Georgia
214 State Capitol
Atlanta, Georgia 30334
February 6, 2012
Please consider the following facts as you review the ruling of Judge Malihi in the recent case regarding a candidate’s eligibility to be on the ballot in Georgia.
Judge Malihi’s ruling allowed a ruling of an Indiana Court of Appeals to Over-rule the one standing opinion of the United States Supreme Court in Minor vs Happerset as to what constitutes a “natural born citizen”.
Judge Malihi’s decision effectively over-ruled the U.S. Constitution’s original protective requirement for Presidential qualifications. If you read Article 1 Section 2 paragraph 5 you discover that it clearly says that a “citizen” cannot be President. Only a “natural born citizen” can be President. The founders who wrote these words were themselves new “citizens” of the United States. Yet they clearly, after allowing their own generation as “citizens” to hold that office of President, they ruled out any further generations of “citizens” who were NOT natural born citizens from the office.
Chief Justice John Jay advised the writers of the Constitution to guard against “foreign influence” in the most powerful office. And thus the word “citizen” was changed to “natural born citizen” as the qualification for President, and the exception for their generation was written in. Clearly the founders were thinking about their progeny as being “natural born citizens” , born to citizen parents, and thus free of any “loyalist” or possible foreign influence from parents upon the office of President. Therefore, Judge Malihi ruled against the wisdom of First Chief Justice John Jay.
If you allow Judge Malihi’s ruling to stand, you are effectively throwing open the door to the potential foreign influence and subterfuge of a child born in the USA to foreign parents who raise that child to have more respect for their native land which is NOT the United States.
This is a very “Dangerous” precedent to set. In our time of constant peril, this endangers the citizens and our nation against the best advice of our founding fathers written on the parchment of the Constitution.
There was a clear definition written and read by our founding fathers and the authors of the Constitution, including John Jay. It was Emerich Vatel’s “Law of Nations”. Book 2 Chapter 19, paragraph 212, which stated that “ “ The natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens “
As you should see, Minor vs Happerset agreed with this definition understood by the Founders.
Senator John Armor Bingham, one of the principle authors of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution had this to say about “natural born citizen”.
Senator Bingham said while speaking about the rights of citizens in the U.S. House of Representatives on March 6, 1866 the following :
[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…. . .
- John Bingham in the United States House on March 9, 1866 (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
Pleases note the words “ … of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty, is in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. “
Mr. Secretary, Sir, I fear that Judge Malihi’s ruling was a ruling of convenience. I fear that his ruling has done serious damage to the very words of the Constitution that seek to preserve the office of the President from foreign intrigue.
You, Sir, can remedy this tragic situation. Only you have that unique position. The spirits of the Founders are watching what you do.
The People have been carefully watching our courts to see if they have any standing under the law and the Constitution anymore. Apparently to all judges who have ruled in these cases, slurring common ordinary citizens as “birthers,” the citizen no longer has Rights under the Constitution. We have all but lost our faith and respect for the courts of America.
Judge Malihi’s ruling says that we now have a Government of the People, by the Government and For the Government. What a shame.
A Natural Born Citizen
Of the United States of America
(Both my father and mother were citizens at my birth).
Well done. We all need to send letters to the Sec of State and express his will to enforce the Constitution, not one biased Adminstrative Judge who has no clue of Constitutional law.
Ray...that is the best argument offered up yet. Maybe it should be sent to the judge as a dissenting opinion under friend of the court status. (Not his Friend the courthouse's friend).
Excellent letter. Now if we would have a Braveheart to stand for Truth, Honor and Justice.
One Braveheart is Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Manicopa County Arizona. Wyatt Earp has nothing on Sheriff Joe and His 3000 Member "Volunteer Posse".
MAYBE WE SHOULD FORM "VOLUNTEER POSSE" ALL OVER THE COUNTRY SINCE..."LAW AND ORDER" SEEMS TO BE IN FEW LOCATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
WHEN I WAS A CHILD WE HAD "BIG MEN & WOMEN" THAT LOOK AFTER US THAT COULD NOT LOOK AFTER OURSELVES... WE NEED THAT AGAIN !
The ruling of Administrative Judge Malihi in GA was error ridden and atrocious! The defendant, the CANDIDATE Obama … nor even his lawyer … bothered to even appear in court, ignored a court subpoena, told the court and the Secretary of State of GA they were not going to participate in the GA courts as to whether they will be on the ballot or not, and yet the Judge ruled in the defendant’s favor. Is GA a banana republic state where its courts can be totally ignored by a subpoenaed defendant and they still win the case. A total miscarriage of justice and failure of the rule of law. Rulings by the administrative Judge Malihi have been overruled in the past by the Secretary of State. Here is one example: http://sos.georgia.gov/pressrel/pr000607.htm The current ruling by Judge Malihi in favor of the scoff-law candidate Obama should be overruled by the current Secretary of State too and Obama should not be placed on the GA ballot. He slipped through the cracks unnoticed as to his eligibility flaws in the 2008 primary process. He cannot be allowed to slip through the cracks again in the 2012 primary election process. The constitutionally ineligible CANDIDATE Obama is under the rule of law like everyone else and should be punished for his arrogant behavior to the sovereign state of GA, in essence flipping the bird to the state of GA. Keep Obama off the GA ballot. He defaulted by not showing up for that court hearing. He is not a dictator … yet.