Obama Eligibility Lawsuit Thrown out in Alabama; Two More Filed

SUITS CLAIM OBAMA NOT A “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN”

by Sharon Rondeau

Three lawsuits have been filed against the Alabama DNC regarding Obama's eligibility for candidacy

(Jan. 10, 2012) — On January 9, 2012, an Alabama lawsuit asking a judge to deny the certification of Barack Hussein Obama was dismissed after a request for a stay was denied.

Judge Helen Shores Lee allegedly did not allow a court reporter or media into the hearing held at 9:00 a.m. Monday morning in the Jefferson County, AL Circuit Court in Birmingham.  Lee is serving her second year of a six-year term.

Albert E. Hendershot filed suit on December 14, 2011 in Jefferson County against Mark Kennedy, Chairman of the Democrat Party of Alabama, asking for a preliminary injunction and evidentiary hearing on the question of whether or not Obama is constitutionally qualified to serve as president and have his name placed on the 2012 ballot in the state.  Hendershot cited “elections fraud and forgery” and a desire to “assure the citizens of Alabama integrity of the elections process.”

In an interview with The Post & Email today, Hendershot said, “The attorney for the defendant, Brad [Ragsdale], wanted us to speak with the judge in chambers to get it dismissed there.  I didn’t want to do that.  The judge denied my legal right under the U.S. Constitution to have an attorney.  We had filed a motion for her to recuse herself based upon her political bias.”

The Post & Email asked what evidence existed of “political bias,” and Hendershot said, “She’s a Democrat, and she’s also liberal.  She has backed Obama on a lot of issues.”

He reported that his mother was a refugee from Cuba during the 1960s and that he was born in Ft. Lauderdale, FL.  “I literally showed her my grandfather’s green card and said, ‘Ma’am, I’ve half-Cuban.’  I asked for the motion for her to recuse herself and she refused, so I asked to withdraw the case and find a different judge.  Then she came up with the statement that my reason for her to recuse herself was based on the fact that she was “black like President Obama.”  Hendershot said that the comment from the judge was unprovoked.  “I was denied legal counsel and a court reporter.  So there’s no written record of the case because she was already predisposed to dismiss the case.  Afterward I kept my mouth shut and didn’t say anything.  This is the first interview I’ve done since the case was dismissed.”

Alabama DNC Chairman Mark Kennedy is a retired judge.  The Party statement declares that “the government is of laws and not men,” but it does not appear to mention the state constitution or U.S. Constitution.

A local news report said that Hendershot’s lawsuit complained that Obama “is not a U.S. citizen.”  However, on page 2 of the filing, the plaintiff discusses the meaning of “natural born Citizen” as referred to in the case of Minor v. Happersett.  The Motion to Dismiss reportedly filed on New Year’s Day appears to have been removed.  Hendershot is quoted as having discussed “eligibility” and alleged crimes, not whether or not Obama is a U.S. citizen.  A link to “chairman’s filing” at the bottom of the article is also dead.

The Alabama Democrat Party reportedly claimed that “the  court has no authority over a ballot determined by the Democratic party.”  Mark Kennedy’s Motion for Expedited Status conference can be found here, which states that “There is some urgency about this matter” regarding the deadline of January 19, 2012 for certification of candidates.

On January 6, Judge Helen Shores Lee denied Hendershot’s Motion to Stay which requested that the January 9 hearing be postponed after Atty. Orly Taitz agreed to represent him.  Hendershot had asked that the hearing be rescheduled for the end of January so that he could “properly argue the cases” raised by the Democrat Party’s attorney.  He stated that he wants to “keep Obama’s name off the ballot” because he is not a “natural born Citizen.”  Hendershot also said he has “proof” of an alias “attached” to Obama’s home in Chicago.

“The vetting process was not properly completed, so it’s taken us this long to do it, four years too late.”  Hendershot stated that he himself is not constitutionally eligible to run for president on account of having been born to a resident-alien mother.

The Post & Email spoke with Mr. Bradley Davidson, Executive Director of the Alabama Democrat Party, earlier today and asked him his impressions on the meeting with the judge yesterday.  Davidson stated that he had “expected” it to be dismissed and that in his opinion, the lawsuit was “a waste of taxpayers’ money and resources” as well as “frivolous.”  He said that he “cannot believe that the entire federal government, state governments, and all the courts would have permitted a person who is not a U.S. citizen to act as president.”  When we pointed out that Hendershot’s pleading had used the term “natural born Citizen” and not “U.S. citizen,” he stated that his understanding was that in order to be considered “natural born,” one must be born on American soil or U.S. territory.  His understanding was that if a person is born to two U.S.-citizen parents, he or she is a “U.S. citizen” regardless of place of birth.

Mr. Davidson is an economist by profession.  After using the term “democracy,” he stated that the “classical definition” of our form of government is a “constitutional republic” which has “continued to work” over the years.  Davidson originally made the statement that he did not recall any controversy occurring over Sen. John McCain’s eligibility, although we mentioned that Jonathan Turley and The New York Times had questioned McCain’s and others’ qualifications for president as early as 2000.  We also informed him of the essay by Breckinridge Long, who questioned the presidential eligibility of Mr. Charles Evans Hughes, been born to British-citizen parents on U.S. soil.  We recounted the story of Chester Arthur, who reportedly was born to a British-citizen father who did not naturalize until after Arthur was born.

While Hendershot’s dismissal was taking place during the morning of January 9, two other lawsuits were being filed for the same reason, one in the same courthouse.  Plaintiff Harold Sorensen told us that his case, filed against the Alabama Democrat Party and not Obama, has also been assigned to Judge Lee.  He has asked the court clerk to have Lee recuse herself and has filed the necessary request form.  Sorensen had filed a lawsuit against the governor and secretary of state of Alabama to prevent the Electoral College from certifying the vote following the 2008 presidential election.  He stated that his case was dismissed without his having been notified.  “I received a notice that there was a hearing in May.  When I went to court, they were all snickering and laughing and said, ‘Your case has been dismissed.’  I filed a judicial complaint against the judge for having the case dismissed and then turning around a few minutes later and establishing a court date.”

Sorensen’s 2008 case was filed as Sorensen v. Riley.

4 Responses to "Obama Eligibility Lawsuit Thrown out in Alabama; Two More Filed"

  1. PeoplePower   Monday, January 16, 2012 at 4:45 PM

    Judges, lawyers, republicans, democrats, supreme court justices, congress, senate and the office of the president all know what a natural born citizen is. They are complicit in this fraud that is being perpetrated against the US and its citizenry. The government is tainted, compromised and corrupted and must be removed by the People. We will not get justice from these lawless felons.

  2. Redteam   Friday, January 13, 2012 at 1:51 AM

    cwgf, you are only partially correct. The constitution is SUPPOSED to be the law of the land. However, the Judge is the real law of the land. They can do whatever they wish and you can’t do a darn thing about it. No one, according to Judges, is entitled to due process. Just because the Constitution says so doesn’t mean a damn thing. You can be taken to court and found guilty (liable) without ever even being notified that they had a court date for you. They just sign the judgment and that’s it.

    old1, yep you got that right. The judges don’t have to grant you the right to have your day in court; they can just declare you guilty.

  3. cwgf   Thursday, January 12, 2012 at 2:10 AM

    The Constitution is still the law of the land, even if the judges do not uphold it. The Constitution trumps the corrupt judge.

  4. old1   Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:53 PM

    You know a country is in trouble when its own citizens can’t get its courts to honestly hear a grievance! That is where We The People find ourselves today. What will result from this restriction of freedom is scary! God help US!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.