Another case challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president has been turned back by the U.S. Supreme Court, but the man who brought it, Philip J. Berg, said the issue won’t disappear.
“I am committed to keep our efforts going to continue litigation until the truth of Obama being ‘not qualified’ for president comes out. The Obama candidacy is the biggest ‘HOAX’ ever put forth to the citizens of the United States in 230 years,” Berg said in a statement today confirming the latest arguments submitted to the high court weren’t given a further hearing.
According to Berg’s statement, his case was dealt with at a conference among the justices Friday.
WND has reported on the long series of legal cases challenging Obama’s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office based on questions and allegations about his birth place that could disqualify him because of the Constitution’s demand that the president be a “natural born” citizen.
“In addition to the current case in the U.S. Supreme Court, we have or will have … a case filed two months ago captioned Berg vs. Obama,” Berg’s statement said.
He said that case remains “under seal,” and he isn’t commenting on it.
Another case, Berg pointed out, Hollister vs. Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, also is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The suit by a retired U.S. Air Force colonel raises the issue of whether military personnel would be required to obey an order from Obama if the commander-in-chief is not qualified to hold office.
Several other cases also remain pending, including a motion on an issue related to Berg’s case scheduled for a Supreme Court conference Friday. A conference on yet another case is scheduled Jan. 23, which means the dispute will follow Obama into the White House, since his inauguration is Jan. 20.
“If Obama is sworn in as president, we will file a Petition for Writ of ‘Quo Warranto,’ a case that will challenge Obama as being ineligible to serve as president because he is ‘not qualified,’” Berg said.
Berg said Obama simply should hold a news conference and affirm, “Because of things in my background, I cannot be sworn in as president.”
Berg, whose information is on his ObamaCrimes.com website, said he was concerned by the court’s most recent decision.
“I am disappointed for the 300-plus million U.S. citizens, our ‘forefathers’ and for the tens of thousands that have died defending ‘our’ Constitution,” he said.
“Obama is setting himself up to be blackmailed and perhaps he is already being blackmailed,” said Berg. “He was the candidate for ‘change,’ but look at his cabinet – 70 percent from President Clinton’s days and how about his Secretary of Defense, Gates. Give me a break!”
The court earlier denied full hearings to cases brought by Cort Wrotnowski and Leo Donofrio. But following a pending hearing on a related issue to Berg’s case this Friday, a conference also is scheduled Jan. 23 on the case Gail Lightfoot et al v. Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State.
The Lightfoot case is being handled by Orly Taitz, who said the issue is significant.
“Each and every member of the U.S. Congress and Senate owes it to 320 million American citizens to do his due diligence and demand all necessary records,” she said.
Taitz said her case was rejected by the California Supreme Court with a single-word decision, “Denied.” Her arguments, she said, rest on precedents from both the California Supreme Court, which years ago removed a candidate for president from the ballot because he was only 34, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s affirmation of that ruling.
“We’ll see what happens,” she told WND. “This is not going to go away.”
There have been no substantive answers to date about the questions raised, and Obama has decided, for whatever reason, not to release a bona fide copy of his original birth certificate in its complete form.
The lawsuits allege Obama does not meet the “natural born citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
Some allege his birth took place in Kenya, and his mother was a minor at the time of his birth – too young to confer American citizenship. They argue Obama’s father, Barack Obama Sr., was a Kenyan citizen subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time and would have handed down British citizenship.
Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 200,000 others and sign the petition demanding proof of eligibility now!
There also are questions raised about Obama’s move to Indonesia when he was a child and his attendance at school there when only Indonesian citizens were allowed and on what nation’s passport he traveled to Pakistan in the ’80s.
Last month, WND reported similar concerns raised in a separate lawsuit filed in California.
“Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void,” argues a case brought on behalf of Ambassador Alan Keyes, also a presidential candidate. “Americans will suffer irreparable harm in that (a) usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.”
Because of the high stakes, WND earlier launched a letter campaign to contact Electoral College members and urge them to review the controversy.
The effort followed a campaign that sent more than 60,000 letters by overnight delivery to the U.S. Supreme Court when one case contesting Obama’s eligibility for the Oval Office was pending.
A separate petition, already signed by more than 200,000 also is ongoing, asking election authorities to seek proof Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the natural born citizen clause in the Constitution.
WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi went to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama’s birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.
The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn’t simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors.
The governor’s office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii? An online image of a “Certification of Live Birth” posted by the Obama campaign has been dismissed as irrelevant since the state of Hawaii at the time granted such certificates to parents whose children were not born in Hawaii.