Liberty Legal Foundation respects all the legal efforts to date to address Obama’s eligibility. For those legal challenges that are still ongoing, we pray for their success. In preparing the following legal strategy, we learned a great deal from those valiant efforts.
Strategy #1 – Standing: the death knell for most challenges to date.
Standing requires a plaintiff to show that they will be harmed, in a particular way that is not speculative. We preempt the Defendants’ standing defense by having a class of plaintiffs that are candidates for the Presidency, including independent candidates that will be a part of the general election. Any candidate running in this election will be less likely to win if Obama appears on the ballot. This harm is not speculative, it is certain. It is the harm of lowering a candidate’s chance of winning. The speculative nature of the candidate winning an election is irrelevant to this argument. Courts cannot simply conclude that a candidate has no chance of winning without throwing out the entire purpose of holding democratic elections. In other words, standing does not require that a plaintiff be in exactly the same position as a defendant. All they must show is harm that is particular to them and is not speculative. We have overcome this initial hurdle.
Strategy #2 – Defendants: no government actors.
The only Defendants named in this action are private parties. This is done for two reasons. First, when suing a government agency, one must overcome immunities, procedural advantages, and tax-payer funded Defense attorneys. The cases to date have illustrated that this is a frustrating and often futile effort. But more importantly in this case, the Democratic Party is the most appropriate Defendant. Today’s State election officers rely entirely upon the representations made by political parties that their Presidential candidates are qualified to hold the office. Only candidates that are certified by the Party are placed on a state ballot. By naming the National Democratic Party as the defendant we target the entity responsible for vetting the Democratic candidate.
Strategy #3 – Issue: focus on the core Constitutional question.
The Constitution has specific requirements for the Presidency that do not exist for any other Federal office. The Founders set this higher requirement in order to avoid the possibility of our nation’s leader having divided loyalties. For this reason, the Constitution requires that the candidate for the Presidency be the descendant of two persons who were citizens at the time of the person’s birth. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875). Obama, by his own admission, fails this “natural born citizen” requirement.
Strategy #4 – Class Action: gives voice to many, legitimizes the issue, and supports standing.
By filing as a class action we have more plaintiffs with individual circumstances likely to have standing. Any specific facts that either the defendants or the court claim to be “good enough” for standing will likely be met by SOMEONE in our class action. If only one plaintiff has standing, ALL other plaintiffs are able to proceed. Also, as a class action we give voice to all of the disenfranchised people that want to be represented on this issue. Finally, by showing that a large number of Americans object to a non-natural-born citizen appearing on the ballot, we legitimize this issue in the minds of the judges that will hear our case. This is why we need as many people to join the class action as possible. Please join and help us spread the word.
JOIN THE CERTIFICATION CLASS ACTION
