Submitted to a Candid World

It seems I’ve struck a nerve. My previous post, slamming Leo Donofrio for what I generously call his “legal theories” alleging President-Elect Obama’s ineligibility to serve, continues to rack up comments here (read one gem) and at Donofrio’s own blog, on his latest thread, where one of his readers seems to think I’m a transition team lawyer. Rock!

With all of this attention, I’m sad to say that the case will come to a screeching halt tomorrow, when after a conference between all nine Justices, the group will vote to deny certiorari (appellate review), letting stand the adverse judgment. I’ve covered in the aforementioned article a few reasons why they’ll deny review, but here’s one more.

The Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction only allows it to take review of state court decisions if the state court below adjudicated a federal right. Accordingly, SCOTUS does not have discretionary review over state-law claims unless a federal right is raised, and Donofrio’s only complaint (as far as I can see from the few documents he’s posted) is that the New Jersey Secretary of State failed to discharge her legal duties, by not reviewing Obama’s eligibility. In short, his complaint derives only from state law: although his complaint would raise serious federal questions, if it were true, the general implication of federal interests is insufficient to confer appellate review, where the plaintiff has not himself raised an injury deriving from federal law. This is the problem with Donofrio’s complaint: while suing in state court on state-law claims gets him around the federal standing bar that killed Berg v. Obama, it means he’s not himself alleging a federal injury (although he, theoretically, could have).

Of course, I could be wrong. If the complaint raises a federal question, maybe the Supreme Court could (theoretically) take appellate review. Problem is, Donofrio hasn’t posted the complaint on any of his three websites. I’ll call him tomorrow to ask for it (he published his contact info).

You have arrived, Ames! There’s even a word for these guys, “Birthers!”

Comment by James F December 5, 2008 @ 11:32 am

Reply

There is no question that fairness and justice should prevail. However When we should be focusing on economy, jobs, war and all the other problems we have at hand, this is a very obsurd way of wasting everyone’s time. It’s time to move on, look forward and not constantly question this guys authenticity – not that he did not go through this enough times during his campaign.

Comment by Suggestions 4 Obama December 5, 2008 @ 5:28 pm

Reply

What’s British citizenship by descent?

Basically, British law distinguishes between those who obtain their British
citizenship by descent, and those who obtain it otherwise than by descent.

“British citizenship by descent” essentially means you were born outside the
UK and obtained your citizenship through a British parent. You are usually
British “by birth” if you were born in the UK. You can also become a British
citizen by naturalisation or by registration or by adoption.

Current Rules on British Citizenship by Descent

Those born on or after 1 January 1983 outside the UK, to a parent who was a
British citizen otherwise than by descent at the time of their birth, are already
British citizens by descent.

For those born before 1 January 1983 outside the UK, the problem has been
until now that they could only become British citizens by descent if their father
was a UK citizen otherwise than by descent – not their mother.

There was limited provision for several years for UK-citizen mothers to exceptionally
register their overseas-born children as British citizens by descent with British
consular authorities until the child’s 18th birthday, but if your mother didn’t
realise this was an option, you may have missed out on British citizenship
while you were a minor. You will instead just have the right of abode in the
UK.

Barack Obama’s father was born in Kenya. Kenya didn’t become independant till December 12,1963. Barack Obama was born August 1961 making him a Brittish citizen by decent.

Comment by Hanen December 6, 2008 @ 10:39 pm

Reply

[...] news, everyone! Leo Donofrio (remember him?) finally called it quits, and retired from his second career of tilting at legal windmills and [...]

Pingback by Someone Get Leo Donofrio Some Help February 3, 2009 @ 12:33 pm

Reply

[...] (Sidenote: because the validity of Prop 8’s enactment turns upon California constitutional law, the California Supreme Court is the final arbiter: the Supreme Court doesn’t take appeal on issues of pure state law. That’s the mistake the “birthers” made.) [...]

Pingback by Waiting on Prop 8: What We Talk About, When We Talk About Judicial Review March 6, 2009 @ 6:20 am

Reply

[...] (Sidenote: because the validity of Prop 8’s enactment turns upon California constitutional law, the California Supreme Court is the final arbiter: the Supreme Court doesn’t take appeal on issues of pure state law. That’s the mistake the “birthers” made.) [...]

Pingback by Waiting on Prop 8: What We Talk About, When We Talk About Judicial Review « Submitted to a Candid World June 6, 2009 @ 11:45 am

Reply