Asked & Answered

No. Liberty Legal Foundation litigates cases pro bono and covers all court costs. Win or lose, plaintiffs won't bear any costs or attorney's fees. While it is possible that a judge could levy costs against plaintiffs, it is extremely unlikely. However, should that happen, Liberty Legal Foundation will cover any such costs. Liberty Legal Foundation is a non-profit organization and can only continue this work with the support of those who believe in our mission. Donations in any amount are always welcome and critical to continuing our work.

The Obamacare Class Action lawsuit will not be dropped or reduced in scope, regardless of who is elected President. I am at least as skeptical of Republicans as I am of Democrats. I trust results. So far the Republicans have failed our country.

Any U.S. citizen can be a member of a Liberty Legal Foundation class action. We just need to verify your identity by running a small credit card transaction. This counts as a tax deductible donation to Liberty Legal Foundation and helps us cover the costs of the lawsuit. It’s very important to our mission of restoring the Constitution in the courts and in Congress that as many Americans join us as possible. We are providing an opportunity for Americans to join together and be heard with one voice, in a court of law, where neither the courts or the government can ignore our complaints.

You have every right to sue the Federal government for a redress of grievances without fear of reprisal. It is unheard of for a plaintiff to be sued by the government for bring a case alleging a violation of Constitutional rights. The court may assess costs to the plaintiffs, but Liberty Legal Foundation would cover any assessed costs.

Woo Hoo!! Your story is inspiring. If more Americans were willing to stand up to government bullies we would have fewer government bullies.

We need everyone who cares about this issue to inundate the media with the simple fact that Obama is not natural born because his father wasn't a citizen. We need to keep our communications simple but constant. All the theories are interesting, and I think we all would like to know why the birth certificate was forged, but in order to get this back into the mainstream media, we need to stay focused on the one argument that is not in dispute.

The cases brought by the States are being represented primarily by the attorneys’ general of the states. They are primarily attacking the individual mandate within Obamacare. Our Obamacare Class Action is different in several ways: first, we represent the people, not the states; second, we oppose Obamacare in its entirety, not just the individual mandate; third, we are arguing that the commerce clause precedent from 1942 should be overturned, not just reinterpreted.

For all these reasons, we are separate from the States’ lawsuits. We hope the state lawsuits succeed, and we benefit from any victories they have in court, but the OCA takes on a much bigger battle than what the states have chosen to take on that will impact larger Constitutional issues.

Previous lawsuits were not against the DNC. They were against various government officials, including the President. In our lawsuit, we avoid suing government defendants specially so that they can't hide behind government immunity. Also, most state election laws rely on the DNC to vet their candidate. Our suit raises facts that if the DNC does not respond to makes them guilty of negligent misrepresentation or fraud if still certify Obama for the ballot.

Yes you can. Simply entered a statement regarding your citizen states in the comments field during signup.

Currently serving military members should be aware of the risks in joining a lawsuit. Arguably joining a lawsuit against the Commander-in-Chief breaches military protocol by jumping the chain of command. Therefore current military members are welcome to join, but are advised to do so only after considering this issue. We advise military members to think carefully about this issue, and discuss it with their local JAG Officer, before joining.

Those are hypotheticals we can't answer. If we are successful in keeping Obama off the ballot, that is a victory for the Constitution. The Democrats would then have to nominate a new candidate through some process. The requirement that the candidate be a "natural born citizen" would still apply to that candidate as well.

I understand your frustration with the corruption of our court system. However, you shouldn't accuse people who are genuinely working toward the same goals as you of fraud. While I understand your frustration and I agree that our court system is almost certainly corrupted, I don't know exactly who or how or to what degree it is corrupted. You make some accusations about the government's manipulation of the courts. You may be correct, but I don't know you're correct in every instance. One of the goals of Liberty Legal Foundation is to publicly test the court system. The best way to expose corruption is to give the courts clear and simple cases that ask for clear and simple answers to fundamental questions. If the courts are corrupt, our cases will help expose this corruption.

You must admit that most Americans still have blind faith in our court system. Even those that express doubt in it, deep down they have faith that justice is done most of the time. I've seen enough of the legal and political systems to appreciate how misplaced the public trust in our courts is. But most Americans have not had their noses rubbed in court corruption enough to truly believe it. If anyone simply says, "Hey, the courts are corrupt," do you think most Americans will stop what they're doing and pay attention, let alone believe it? No, they habitually ignore such messages or write off the person making the statement as a nut job. You have to prove it to them. People believe truths that they discover for themselves. They rarely believe what they're simply told.

So, we at Liberty Legal Foundation are following the rules. We're filing legitimate cases, using licensed attorneys who are admitted in the highest courts, representing Americans with standing, and making legitimate claims. To the degree that there are still trustworthy judges in our system, we will succeed. When we do, we will make significant advances in restoring our Constitution. To the degree that the system is corrupt, or simply defective, we will expose such corruption and defects. We will do all of this in a way that is above reproach, public, and as loud as we can be about it. One of our goals is to draw attention to the current state of our courts how they treat our Constitution.

I hope you see, now, that our work at Liberty Legal Foundation is important whether courts can be trusted or not. We are certainly not misleading anyone, but are clear about what we are doing and the legal environment we are doing it in.

We would like to file in every state, but presently we lack the resources to do so. The first step to filing in any state is to know that state's election code. Some states, like Georgia, have administrative options before filing in state court. Those avenues must be exhausted first. As a starting point, it is helpful to bring together a group of people in who could do the research into the relevant election law and who would be willing to support the action in each state.

Sam,
I wasn't aware that two-thirds of the states had called for a Constitutional Convention. Please let us know where you got that impression.
Van Irion

You may be right. Time will tell. However, our efforts are important even if we lose. By making the argument we bring attention to the problem. Even more importantly, if they deny our argument they prove that they have become so corrupt that they are worthless. We must give them an opportunity to do the right thing, and condemn their failure if they fail.

Obama's Indonesian school registration, coupled with Indonesian law at the time, is one argument that has been included in our state-court complaint. We don't know that he ever became a U.S. citizen again. However, that is irrelevant because if he was an Indonesian citizen, or a dual citizen, then he is not natural-born.

Thanks for asking as this is one issue that is a bit tricky. It's not possible to change a username. If you want a new username, we can create a new profile for you, then you can log in and make any other changes you need from there. If you would like to do this, email us at help@libertylegalfoundation.net with the username and email address you want to use.
Also, at the bottom of every weekly email is a link to "Manage Your Subscription". Follow that link to change what email address to which you want to email update sent.

Thanks for asking as this is one issue that is a bit tricky. It's not possible to change a username. If you want a new username, we can create a new profile for you, then you can log in and make any other changes you need from there. If you would like to do this, email us at help@libertylegalfoundation.net with the username and email address you want to use.
Also, at the bottom of every weekly email is a link to "Manage Your Subscription". Follow that link to change what email address to which you want to email update sent.

If someone could explain to me how a person takes an oath before God to uphold the Constitution then time and again votes in such a way that violates that oath, I would appreciate it! This is behavior I have never understood. My theories are that some are evil and seek to control others to that extent, some are willfully blind to what they are doing, and some are too ignorant to understand the impact of their actions. Those categories don't fall along party lines.

You are right. The answer to your question is, Obamacare is unconstitutional, for exactly the reason you state.