Hatewatch Tweets
Hatewatch is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Report, an investigative magazine published by the Alabama-based civil rights group Southern Poverty Law Center.
Georgia Judge Orders Obama to Appear at ‘Birther’ Hearing
A Georgia administrative law judge has left in place a subpoena directing President Obama to appear at a hearing on Thursday regarding a “birther” complaint challenging the president’s eligibility for office.
Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi issued his decision Friday, writing that the president’s legal team “failed to enlighten the court with any legal authority” to back up its argument that no U.S. president should be compelled to attend a court hearing. They also failed to prove that attending the hearing would be “unreasonable and oppressive” and that the president’s testimony would be “irrelevant, immaterial or cumulative,” he wrote.
Orly Taitz, who filed one of the complaints and has for years led the farcical battle to prove that the president is constitutionally unqualified for office, called Malihi’s decision a “major victory.”
“This is the beginning of Watergate2 or ObamaForgeryGate,” she predicted on her website.
Things did not go so well last time Taitz, known as the “birther queen,” tried to take her crusade to the Peach State. In 2009, a federal judge for the Middle District of Georgia fined her $20,000 after she ignored his warnings against filing frivolous lawsuits, slamming her for wasting time and resources and writing that her case and legal strategy “borders on delusional.”
Malihi, whose bailiwick as administrative law judge includes ballot disputes and citizens’ complaints against state agencies, has rarely made the papers since his appointment in 1995 by then-Gov. Zell Miller. However, the little information available suggests a record of broadly interpreting the public’s right to contest state decisions. In 2001, he created small waves by ruling that citizens could challenge a state-issued water-use permit without proving that they would be directly affected by it. And in 2006, he annoyed developers and politicians by ruling in favor of an environmental group that sought to put a marina project on hold because, it said, the state had failed to fully explore its environmental impact.
Court watchers interviewed by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution predicted that the president will not show up in Georgia on Thursday despite Malihi’s ruling. In that case, the administrative law judge will have the option of referring the issue to the county superior court, which would decide whether the president should be held in contempt.
on January 24th, 2012 at 1:03 pm
Anyone who continues to be believe stupidity isn’t a virus, or at the least, some sort of genetic deficiency after reading this may be closer to the wrong side of reality that these neanderthals dwell upon. Its a scary time to be living in America, and one can only pray and hope critical thinking and reason will save the day and our democracy in the end of it all…
on January 24th, 2012 at 1:30 pm
Well there is this (Article III, Sections 2, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution):
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.
I would think the president would qualify as a public MInister.
on January 24th, 2012 at 3:59 pm
The judge didn’t order the President to appear. What happened is that the judge denied the Motion to Quash the Subpoena. He strongly hinted that he wanted the Defense to cite actual cases instead of just saying the President didn’t have to appear. (It was a very sloppy motion.)
As an Administrative Judge, Malihi has no authority to compel the President to appear for the hearing. He can and (often does) make his recommendation without the presence of anyone on the Defense side.
The Judge will make a recommendation to the GA Sec of State, who doesn’t have to accept it. The SoS’s ruling can be appealed to the GA Supreme Court.
In any event, President Obama WON’T be at the hearing. He won’t be compelled to appear. An AJ won’t be declaring the sitting President to be ineligible.
on January 24th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
to be president one has to be a natural born cetizen
thus meaning both parents are born in the USofA
odingos love daddy was born in kenya, when i was in school kenya was in africa. i know things haven’t changed that much…
on January 25th, 2012 at 8:22 am
Hey Wes,
What about all those presidents whose parents were born before the War of Independence? The ‘USofA’ didn’t even EXIST at that point.
Are you saying the first ten or so presidents were in office illegally? Sacre bleu!
on January 25th, 2012 at 9:57 am
@Whatever4
Thank you for the clarification. We have updated the story to more prominently reflect the limitations on Judge Malihi’s authority to enforce the subpoena.
on January 25th, 2012 at 10:33 am
Wes, “natural born US citizen” means born in the US or on US soil, not born strictly to parents who are US citizens.
on January 25th, 2012 at 12:07 pm
Wasn’t it Emerson who wrote something about a “foolish consistency”?
on January 25th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
So if a woman has a C-section is the child eligible to run for president or does the “MacDuff exclusion” apply?
on January 25th, 2012 at 6:35 pm
Nobody seems bent out of shape by the fact that John McCain was born not in the contiguous 48 states (at the time), but the Panama Canal Zone.
These attacks on Mr. Obama’s birthplace are far from altruistic defense of the Constitution.
on January 26th, 2012 at 1:21 am
“Natural born” means either that one was physically born on U.S. soil to parents who were not bearers of foreign diplomatic passports, or else one was physically born to U.S. citizens abroad, thus excluding those who were either naturalized or adopted into citizenship. George Romney and John McCain were both born to U.S. citizens abroad, and were admitted to candidacy. Someone physically born on U.S. soil can have parents from Mars and qualify, so long as said Martian parents weren’t diplomats. If one parent was a foreign diplomat and the other an American citizen, and the child is born on U. S. Soil, it’s a citizen. Born abroad, it would follow the citizenship of its mother in most cases. A child born on a U.S. flagged government vessel anywhere in the world is a natural-born citizen; on a U.S. flagged civilian vessel, it is one if born on the high seas. The President, born in the state of Hawaii to an American mother, is a “natural-born citizen” however you cut it, even if some other sovereign might also recognize citizenship.
There is nothing in the Constitution which would prevent a “natural-born” U.S. citizen who lost or gave up citizenship and later reclaimed it from qualifying. Arnold Schwartzenegger could not qualify, but Mel Gibson could.
on January 26th, 2012 at 10:21 am
…and just what will happen to Obama IF it is proven that he was born in a foreign country, does he need to “go back to where he came from” and the country go back to the mess in which Bush left our country? (God forbid)
on January 26th, 2012 at 11:09 am
I would have thought this ‘birther’ nonsense would have been dead and buried… but it seem to be on life-support…
Also unless I am wrong, I would think this would be under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government and not under the jurisdiction of any State, County, nor local government.
It’s time for this ‘birther’ nonsense to perish.
on January 26th, 2012 at 11:15 am
This whole manufactured controversey is nauseating. Is there no way in which stupidity and hate mongering could be identified for what they are, and people who spout utter nonsence such as Orly Taitz can be treated to what they would hate most? Ignore them!
on January 26th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
@wes when you were in school? Me thinks you may need to go back.
on January 26th, 2012 at 12:46 pm
This is all evidence of the growing pains this Country is experiencing including some in Georgia . President O’Bama will obey the Laws of Georgia and the United States .
on January 26th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
@ Ithink said
My theory has been that there are a finite number of IQ points in the universe and the more kids born, the thinner they’re spread.
on January 26th, 2012 at 1:28 pm
What kind of moron ALJ issues an order requiring the President to appear and prove his citizenship? The state of Georgia does not decide those qualifications! It’s in the federal constitution Article II!!! He lacks jurisdiction!! Has Mr. ALJ read the constitution or do they skip that entirely in Georgia???? When will the racist birthers shut up and go home?
on January 26th, 2012 at 1:54 pm
I’m sure there are many in this country who would like to see President Obama thrown out-of-office; nay-the country! They are foolish. Oh!, How the Heathen Rage!!! A POX on them all.
on January 26th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Wes Hardin is mistaken. on January 24th, hewrote, in part, “to be president one has to be a natural born cetizen [sic] thus meaning both parents are born in the USofA.”
A “natural born citizen” is anyone born in United States territory whether or not any of his parents were citizens at the time of his birth. The child of citizens born abroad can also be a natural born citizen if he is registered in a timely manner and visits US territory at least once before coming od age.
on January 26th, 2012 at 3:14 pm
one of the best points I’ve ever heard about this was the simple question:
how many of the people who think that Obama was born outside of the U.S. do not realize that Hawaii is a state?
on January 26th, 2012 at 5:00 pm
To all you ignorant dis-believers, please read the U.S. Constitution, XIV, section 1. Educate yourselves, and stop making a fool of yourselves.
on January 26th, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Orly Taitz is a nut.
on January 26th, 2012 at 6:32 pm
The blatant racism that has run rampant in this country since Obama took office is shameful and pathetic. How “backwoods redneck ignorant” do people really want to be, and WHY?? He has done more for this country than GW Bush ever did. It is abhorrent that so many people are blind and being LED by the blind, when the matter of race is brought up. Do some research, read some books, get educated before jumping on the hate-filled bandwagon.
on January 26th, 2012 at 9:04 pm
Bye bye nobama
on January 26th, 2012 at 10:48 pm
It’s amazing the number of Ostrichs here with their heads buried, that can’t comprehend the difference between a computer graffics generated forged birth certificate and an original 1961 typewriter created birth certificate.
Question for Jerry Avins; Where did you come up with claiming “Anchor Babies” are “Natural Born Citizens”?
“Natural Born Citizen” is born on the soil to TWO parents who are citizens. Obama’s own book claims when he was born, he was a British Empire subject.
If Obama has nothing to hide why does he go to such great lenths to keep from releasing the documents proving he is who his resume claims he is.
on January 27th, 2012 at 12:21 am
Mitt Romney’s father was born in Mexico. Mitt was built at the Autoanimatronics Lab in Disney world
on January 27th, 2012 at 11:01 am
Sam Molloy in honor of your post I’m officially requesting that Hatewatch add a “like” button. Perhaps at the same time they could add a “hate” button which would delete any and all posts by anyone who clicked it!
on January 27th, 2012 at 11:06 am
USA-1 “The Congressional Research Service has stated that the weight of scholarly legal and historical opinion indicates that the term means one who is entitled under the Constitution or laws of the United States to U.S. citizenship “at birth” or “by birth,” including any child born “in” the United States (other than to foreign diplomats serving their country), the children of United States citizens born abroad, and those born abroad of one citizen parent who has met U.S. residency requirements.”
Still wondering if a vaginal delivery is required to qualify as “birth.” Shakespeare didn’t think so.
on January 27th, 2012 at 1:44 pm
USA-1, the burden of proof is on you to show that it is a forged birth certificate. The authenticity of his certificate has been attested to by several public figures, and scans have been provided online. This should be sufficient proof. If you disagree, why don’t you provide scans of your birth certificate?
on January 27th, 2012 at 3:37 pm
Ruslan you must be an ostrich with your head in the sand if you can tell the difference between a human who might actually have a birth certificate and a computer generated persona like USA-1.
on January 27th, 2012 at 3:55 pm
To learn what “natural borne citizen” (NBC) means, one must read Minor v. Happersett, a SCOTUS case from about 1875. This is the main SCOTUS case dealing directly with this issue.
Minor v. Happersett holds that if a child is borne to parents that both are citizens AT THE TIME OF BIRTH, that child is an NBC. For others, the case holds, there are doubts whether they are even citizens.
So for instance, if the parents are Chinese who immigrated to the USA and after 7 years both became citizens, any child borne after that is an NBC. When I immigrated to the USA, my first child was borne 3 years later and she is not an NBC as both my wife and I were not citizens yet. My second child was borne 9 years later when both of us were citizens already and hence he is an NBC.
And to all of those who claim that birthers must have low IQ, mine is 143. Is that enough?
on January 27th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
Hefets,
I have never made the claim that ‘birfers’ have low IQs. That is because the IQ score doesn’t matter.
I have, however called your ilk ‘fools’ and ‘idiots,’ and I stand by my claims.
American jurisprudence places the burden of proof on the accuser, rather than the accused. The President has produced every single document requested of him, even though there was no requirer for it. You ‘Great American Patriots’ have rebutted these documents with nothing but specious arguments and hearsay. You’ve lost. Deal with it.
By the way, speaking of documenting claims, how about you produce notarized copies of your intelligence tests to prove that you DO possess. 143 IQ score. Because without notarized proof, how are you any better than your dreaded ‘Barry Soetoro?’
Game, set, and match.
on January 27th, 2012 at 7:43 pm
Apparently 143 IQ isn’t enough, I am no apologist for Mr. Obama but whatever he is, or isn’t, he is the elected president and the Republican party seems to be going out of it’s way to have him re-elected. You can bash your head into a wall a million times but it will not stop his political juggernaut. Obama will be re-elected and we’ll have to deal with thinly veiled racism for another 4 years. Good luck on your blood pressure birthers…..
on January 28th, 2012 at 11:02 am
Michael, I will not pay attention to your claims until you provide proof of citizenship, a birth certificate, and proof of your legal qualifications.
on January 28th, 2012 at 6:47 pm
Yes, the president should be held to the same strict standards as every other presidential hopeful. But as we know, playing by the rules has never been one of Obama’s strong suits.
Should the president be compelled to appear at this court hearing?…Hell no! That’s about the most disrespectful thing I’ve ever heard. This is not a precedent we want to start. But that’s not to say he shouldn’t have to prove his case, by proxy if necessary; something he has failed to do up to this point. This is the most powerful office in the world. Why would we just turn a blind eye and give anyone a pass?
on January 28th, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Interesting how there was far less screeching about the fact that John McCain was not even born in a United State at all.
He was born in the Panama Canal Zone.
The “birth certificate” game is just racism and fear. The “birthers” have to bring the proofs. That’s how it works. You do your own term paper.
on January 30th, 2012 at 8:51 am
Michael, the later Wick Ho case clearly says that anyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen regardless of citizenship of their parents except for children of persons with diplomatic immunity. I believe the case you are talking about dealt with the child of a diplomat and whether the 14th Amendment changed the rule that children of diplomats are not citizens. The test under the 14th Amendment is whether the parents are subject to the laws of the United States. Unless you want to argue that illegal immigrants aren’t subject to the laws of the U.S. it is a nonsense position. In fact, its even more of a nonsense position when you realize that if you claim that illegal immigrants are not subject to the laws of the U.S. they cannot possibly be illegal because they are not subject to the laws of hte U.S.
If you are so smart, answer this question – what is the citizenship of an American mother and a Canadian father who was born in Mexico?
American law states that the child of an American citizen mother automatically is entitled to U.S. citizenship regardless of where he was born – even had Obama not been born in Hawaii (he was!), he would still be a NBC by virtue of his mother’s citizenship. And American father who meets residentcy requirements can also automatically pass on citizenship.
Did you have a problem with Bill Richardson running for President? His mother is Mexican and I believe he was actually born in Mexico City. He is a natural born U.S. citizen because his father was an American citizen (his father was the head of Citicorp’s Mexico operations). No one was questioning whether he was elgible to run for president (I guess with the name Bill Richardson, nobody realizes he’s Mexican-American!)
In fact, its pretty clear that your primary objection appears to be hostility towards what race or ethnicity certain party’s might have. Wick Ho clearly rejects that saying that anyone born in the U.S. whose parents are subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
And finally, everybody knows that IQ’s are like penis sizes – those men who brag about how large theirs’ are always have small ones.