Sore loser ORLY Tait tries to get a judge to interfere with internal orders of the U.S. army, to give herself a platform from which to challenge the legitimacy of the current U.S. president. As a lawyer, she ought to know that those who need to ratify the President’s citizenship status have done so and that the issue was closed when he took the oath of office. But now, she seems to want an “activist judge” who will retroactively change the law for her. Unsurprisingly, she got a conservative, law-abiding judge who pointed out that her suit was completely out of his field of authority and drop-kicked the case out of court. Here’s his decision: “Judge dismisses ‘birther’ suit.”
Here are some highlights of the judgement from Talking Points Memo:
Then [Judge Clay] turns to tearing apart the complaint of the moment:
First, Plaintiff’s challenge to her deployment order is frivolous. She has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations and conjecture that President Obama is ineligible to serve as President of the United States. Instead, she uses her Complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the President is “an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.”
The judge lambastes Taitz’s logic, writing: “Unlike in Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so does not make it so.”
He describes the complaint’s assertion that Obama has the burden to prove his “natural born” status as “a remarkable shifting of the traditional legal burden of proof.” And he says even a middle schooler could see the irony here:
Thus, Plaintiff’s counsel, who champions herself as a defender of liberty and freedom, seeks to use the power of the judiciary to compel a citizen, albeit the President of the United States, to “prove his innocence” to “charges” that are based upon conjecture and speculation. Any middle school civics student would readily recognize the irony of abandoning fundamental principles upon which our Country was founded in order to purportedly “protect and preserve” those very principles.