by Sharon Rondeau

(Jun. 16, 2022) — A case filed early last month with the purpose of ascertaining the constitutional eligibility of two candidates in Minnesota’s fifth congressional district Democratic primary by another candidate, AJ Kern, is scheduled for a hearing on June 23 at 2:30 PM in the state’s Fourth Judicial District courthouse in Minneapolis.

The suit names incumbent Rep. Ilhan Omar, former Minneapolis City Council member Don Samuels, and Secretary of State Steve Simon as defendants.

Samuels and Omar were born outside the United States, and their naturalization dates, if they exist, have not been made public. “Candidate AJ Kern is requesting proof as to qualifications for office, that candidates Ilhan Omar and Don Samuels provide the underlying proof and documentation as to if, when or how they became United States Citizens to support their sworn Affidavits of Candidacy, to wit, the exact date when they became Citizens of the United States,” Kern wrote in her May 6 complaint. “The proof of the date and proof of citizenship of Ilhan Omar and Don Samuels is all that A J Kern request be provided to her, the Secretary of State, facilitated by this court. Candidate AJ Kern and Minnesota voters have a right to demand the state verify the citizenship of their candidates for the United States Representative as required by the United States Constitution.”

Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution sets forth the qualifications for members of the U.S. House of Representatives, which are:

No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.

“Candidates must make sure they are qualified before filing for office as stated on the Secretary of State website,” Kern asserted.

Prior to her election to Congress in 2018, Omar served one term in the Minnesota House of Representatives representing Minneapolis’s District 60B. Born in Somalia, she arrived in the U.S. at approximately age 12 with her father, who may or may not have naturalized as a U.S. citizen.

On her website, Kern noted an alteration of Omar’s birth year from 1981 to 1982 on the Minnesota state legislative website and other public sites requested by her congressional office in May 2019. The request was made, Kern told The Post & Email last month, two days after she released a video titled, “Omar Never Naturalized.”

Born in Jamaica, Samuels considers himself “an Obama Democrat” and served on the Minneapolis School Board and City Council. On Tuesday, Samuels revealed results of a poll which he said cause him to be “optimistic” about the August 9 primary in which he faces Omar and three other candidates, including Kern.

Early primary voting begins on June 24.

Certified letters sent to Samuels and Omar requesting written permission to obtain their naturalization documents from the U.S. government went unanswered, Kern wrote on page 3 of the complaint.

On May 12, on Simon’s behalf, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison submitted a Motion to Dismiss “as to the Secretary.” “This motion is in lieu of an answer and is made on the ground that the Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over this action and over the Secretary as a defendant,” Ellison wrote.

He further cited Minnesota statute 209.065, which states: “The notice of contest and any answer are the pleadings in the case and may be amended in the discretion of the court. The contest proceedings must be brought on for trial by either the contestant or contestee as soon as practicable within 20 days after the filing of the notice of contest. The court shall proceed in the manner provided for the trial of civil actions so far as practicable.”

Along with the Motion to Dismiss, Ellison filed a Memorandum of Law contending that “Contests of the state primary cannot be filed until mid-August,” citing Subdivision 1 of Minnesota statute 209.021. The statute reads:

Manner; time; contents.

Service of a notice of contest must be made in the same manner as the service of summons in civil actions. The notice of contest must specify the grounds on which the contest will be made. The contestant shall serve notice of the contest on the parties enumerated in this section. Except as provided in section 204D.27, notice must be served and filed within five days after the canvass is completed in the case of a primary or special primary or within seven days after the canvass is completed in the case of a special or general election. If a contest is based on a deliberate, serious, and material violation of the election laws that was discovered from the statements of receipts and disbursements required to be filed by candidates and committees, the action may be commenced and the notice served and filed within ten days after the filing of the statements in the case of a general or special election or within five days after the filing of the statements in the case of a primary or special primary. If a notice of contest questions only which party received the highest number of votes legally cast at the election, a contestee who loses may serve and file a notice of contest on any other ground during the three days following expiration of the time for appealing the decision on the vote count.

On June 9, attorneys for Omar filed a Memorandum of Law contending that Kern’s “Complaint contains nothing more than unfounded and outrageous ‘birther’ allegations that do not have even the veneer of a valid legal claim.” Further, the Memorandum states, “Representative Omar was never properly served” and “the timing and claims in the contest do not fall within the narrow scope of Minnesota Statute Chapter 209.”

Omar specifically cited 209.021: “Service of a notice of contest must be made in the same manner as the service of summons in civil actions.”

Conversely, Kern claims Chapter 209 allows her to challenge the qualifications of other similarly-situated candidates before their names are placed on the primary ballot (p. 3 of complaint). “Both the SOS and Omar attorneys are making the claim that I am contesting an election and I should file after the August primary,” she told us on Thursday.  “They are wrong.  I am not contesting an election.  Omar’s attorney is also claiming this is a ‘birther’ thing.  It is not.  I don’t need her birth certificate.  I don’t care if she was born in 1981 or 1982, etc.  I seek her official naturalization record.”  

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published.

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

  1. Email sent to two Minnesota newspapers and several others today:

    URGENT: A.J. Kern vs Ilhan Omar candidacy case hearing on June 23, 2022

    Please Forward TO: Judge Bridget Sullivan

    June 20, 2022

    Judge Bridget Sullivan,

    It is my understanding that you will be the presiding officer over a hearing on June 23, 2022 to proceed with, or dismiss altogether, Plaintiff AJ Kern’s challenge of Defendant Omar’s eligibility to be a legal U.S. citizen-candidate for the office of U.S. Representative.

    I’m 73, born and resided in USA all my life as a sole “natural born [U.S.] Citizen”, with no criminal history, and I am a descendant of an English immigrant, Edmund Mooers, who first arrived in America in 1638. USA is my sole soul country, to be sure.

    Is Ilhan Omar a duly naturalized U.S. citizen or is Ilhan Omar a foreign-national Somali-citizen or is Ilhan Omar a “dual-citizen” or other?

    I believe that every single legal U.S. citizen has an inalienable right-to-know (are candidates legally/Constitutionally eligible to run for office?) and a practical need-to-know (which candidate shall I vote for?) and a patriotic duty-to-know (which candidates are U.S. citizens who might potentially be directing U.S. soldiers in times of war?) the full identity and full life history of any candidate and any incumbent and any ex-incumbent at any time. Any effort to suppress this stated standard of transparency will naturally be greeted with open suspicion and latent distrust among We the People on Main Street USA.

    Therefore, I believe that it would be a criminal act worthy of prosecution and punishment, including disbarment, under existing prescribe laws, for any U.S. judge or any state-licensed U.S. attorney or any U.S. Secretary of State or any U.S. state Attorney General or any U.S. state Governor to passively, or actively, assist any candidate for U.S. President or U.S. VP or U.S. Senator or U.S. Representative, to work to deny/cover-up/rob every single legal U.S. citizen of any public knowledge that is rightfully theirs to possess, including the denial/cover-up/robbery of legal U.S. citizens of any indisputable knowledge of any candidate’s U.S. citizenship and foreign-citizenship(s) (if any) documentation.

    I believe this case is predominantly about “citizenship enforcement”.

    It is natural that any human’s invisible thoughts within the private bedrooms of their mind must precede their open observable behaviors. Sense-think-do, repeatedly, all our lives.

    The open observable behaviors of Ilhan Omar, when translated into English, say to me, at least, “I will not yield to nor assimilate U.S. laws, traditions and values, rather, I am here to assassinate those values by exploiting today’s freedoms to remove those freedoms tomorrow”. That consistently ungrateful publicly displayed behavior by Omar, such calculated callousness, leads me to reasonably believe that Omar is not a (naturalized) U.S. citizen and Omar is defiantly determined to cover-up this reality, possibly with your help, Judge Sullivan, and possibly with the help of the hired (criminal?) zeal of her state-licensed U.S. attorneys, I believe, as a seasoned U.S. student of Life.

    Founding Father, John Jay, invented and promoted the term of art “natural born Citizen” within our gifted U.S. Constitution as a strong check against any foreign-allegiance and/or any foreign-citizen from being eligible to be elected President, VP, Senator or Representative of The United States:

    July 25, 1787 letter to George Washington >>>
    July 25, 1788 ratification assembly in New York >>>,it%20adopted%20Jay's%20proposed%20amendment.

    In reading about John Jay and the U.S. Constitution, I find no mention of “dual-citizen” being specifically made eligible to be a U.S. President or VP or Senator or Representative, do you, Judge Sullivan?

    John Jay’s life experiences during and after the American Revolution led him to conclude that engrained foreign ambitions and life-acquired foreign preferences would naturally undermine, or cancel altogether, the risks, sacrifices and benevolent Christian intentions of the First U.S. Citizens and Founding Fathers if recklessly left unchecked to flourish as foreign-takeovers within the highest government offices of our land.

    On behalf of millions of legal U.S. citizens, please do not summarily dismiss this case and, instead, lead and cooperate with law and citizenship enforcement to (1) discern the indisputable verifiable citizenship of Defendant Ilhan Omar and (2) proceed to prosecute Omar if it is discovered that she has, in fact, ever worked to cover-up her lack of U.S. citizenship, lest you and all other associated law enforcement/citizenship enforcement officials be seen (and prosecuted?) as co-criminals with Omar as well; AJ Kern does not intend to be a co-criminal so she has apparently brought this case to the proper authorities seeking proof of Omar’s verifiable candidate-citizenship and indisputable candidate-eligibility.

    Thank you for your considerations herein,

    Jonathan David Mooers, BSCE, MBA, PE (MA, ME, NH, NY), Fellow and Life Member- American Society of Civil Engineers, LT (Ret.)- US Army Corps of Engineers, Grandparent
    Naples, FL CELL 978-771-8338

    1. As the Secretary of State already explained to Kern, there is no law requiring a candidate to disclose proof of citizenship.

      A judge cannot compel what the law does not require.

      A judge, especially a state judge, does not prosecute federal law.

      A judge will not be prosecuted for dismissing a legally baseless lawsuit. Indeed, judges are expected to dismiss baseless lawsuits.

      1. And, Peter, what if this judge broke a bad law to ensure that some 330,000,000 legal U.S. citizens will, in fact, know that Ilhan Omar is not a Constitutionally eligible candIDate?

        We see BurnLootMurder (“BLM”) breaking good laws and good property and good lives and pretty much going scot free with today’s stand-down law enforcement, but what is the existing prescribed penalty (fines, imprisonment, disbarment, et al) for any U.S. judge over-riding a law that robs rightful candIDate knowledge from trusting voters; for any U.S. judge ignoring a law that supports voter co-criminality and would make that judge a co-criminal as well by defending it?

        See this visual: Judge Sullivan puts Ilhan Omar under oath at June 23 hearing this week and asks Omar if she is a naturalized U.S. citizen? Ilhan mouths off, her MO, and the judge then remands, not dismisses, remands to SOS and continues the case with a reminder to the Minnesota SOS (Secretary of State, the chief of elections) that the supreme law of our land, the U.S. Constitution, mandates that any U.S. Representative candidate/incumbent/ex-incumbent MUST be a fully legal U.S. citizen, or else, be punished under existing prescribed laws for the criminal act of willfully and knowingly engaging in candIDate/incumbent fraud as a non-U.S. citizen.

        Only Peter Pan would sprinkle “salt Peter” over any U.S. courtroom in order to defend pretend cartoon laws that promote ignorance of Constitutional reality and voter co-criminality, right Peter?

        1. There is nothing criminal in a judge ruling Kern’s case is baseless.

          A judge who broke the law would be charged with a crime and removed from the bench. And a litigant harmed by a judge’s extralegal action would seek relief in a higher court.

          Which are among the reasons this judge will apply the law as currently written and dismiss Kern’s suit.

          Those wanting better laws about eligibility verification should focus on legislators because judges can’t give them what they want.

        2. Legislators could amend the law, which could be said to be a form of overruling.

          Judges could rule a law is unconstitutional or otherwise void, which also could be said to be a form of overruling.

          But the only issue before this judge is whether to dismiss Kern’s suit, which this judge will do.

      2. As Kern explained to the Secretary of State, the U.S. Constitution mandates/requires a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives be a U.S. Citizen.

        A judge is compelled to abide the U.S. Constitution and, therefore, is duty bound to ascertain whether a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives is/is not a U.S. Citizen.

        A judge who dismisses a lawsuit based upon a mandate of the U.S. Constitutional as baseless should be removed from office.

        1. That argument was raised and rejected in some presidential eligibility cases. So this judge also will reject it, and will not be removed from the bench for doing so.

          The U.S. Constitution sets eligibility requirements, but it does not require proof of eligibility.

          The burden is on the challenger to prove ineligibility.

      3. Peter Pan still trying to sprinkle “salt Peter” over the courtroom, to hold-up the U.S. Constitution with reckless obstructions rather that honorably up-hold the U.S. Constitution, with these previous comments herein:

        “The U.S. Constitution sets eligibility requirements, but it does not require proof of eligibility.

        The burden is on the challenger to prove ineligibility.”

        Who would surrender their mind to this farce majeure?

        1. The U.S. Constitution mandates eligibility requirements so it is incumbent upon anyone seeking the PRIVILEGE of serving as a U.S. Representative to prove his/her basic eligibility. Otherwise >>>

        2. It is dangerous non-sense to attempt to place the burden of proof on the challenger in this case because that may be a prohibitively expensive and a fully impossible task, as in the case of Obama and attorney-criminals at Perkins Coie who spent at least $1.5 million to guarantee that finding Obama’s fake IDs and his scamming colleges with “foreign student” rouse would be INSURMONTABLE! >>>

        Real simple, Peter Pan: you refuse to prove eligibility = We refuse to consent to you governing over us!

        1. It isn’t obstructionism to accurate state what the law actually is.

          Again, the U.S. Constitution does not require proof of eligibility. And the argument that burden lies on the candidate to prove eligibility already has been rejected by the courts.

          For those in the United States, the U.S. federal government governs you, regardless of your consent.

          As an aside, there’s no evidence Obama spent at least $1.5 million to promote any fake documents. More basically, there’s no evidence that any of Obama’s documents are fake.

        2. Really: Zullo is not expert in document analysis and he never examined any of Obama’s documents.

          No court or prosecutor ever acted of Zullo’s affidavits.

          None of which, of course, is relevant to Kern’s lawsuit.

  2. Email sent today to AJ Kern and all legal U.S. citizens:

    TO: AJ Kern and all legal U.S. citizens,

    It was good to talk to you, AJ, yesterday, about the upcoming case herein. You mentioned Omar’s attorneys have filed for this case to be dismissed and the hearing for same is scheduled for next week on JUNE 23.

    What is on trial herein is not so much Omar’s proof of naturalization, rather, this case is about citizenship enforcement by U.S.-citizen attorneys and judges and sworn election officials all across the USA. Personally, at age 73, I now see any state-licensed U.S.-citizen attorneys or judges who would work to ensure that millions of legal U.S. citizens, including yourself, AJ, will not see these naturalization documents, if any, of Ilhan Omar (and Ted Cruz, et al), for any man-made reason and jurisprudence (like using picket fences defenses of “it would be an invasion of Omar’s privacy” or “the statutes presently prohibit such naturalization disclosure”, et al), as being criminals masquerading in the courtroom under the color of law.

    In my opinion, criminal Omar and her state-licensed attorney-criminals, then, can be expected to use expensive and intimidating LAWFARE = LAWFEAR, and, therefore, her attorney-criminals should be disbarred for engaging in an attempted robbery of rightful public knowledge since, I believe, and common sense supports, that every single legal U.S. citizen (1) has an inalienable Constitutional right to know the full identity and life history of any candidate for U.S. Congress and (2) has a practical need to know if they should vote for or follow any undocumented candidate lest their possible vote and submission to any legally ineligible candidate become a co-criminal act on the voter’s part and (3) has a patriotic duty to know, particularly those in the U.S. military, if they should submit to any ineligible Congressional candidate that might lead them in times of war .

    What is more important in this case, Omar’s “privacy” as a public official running for a national office or any voter’s right to know and need to know and duty to know Omar’s full identity and full life history?

    In this case, isn’t the “invasion of privacy” defense by attorney-criminals actually an “invasion of piracy of rightful public knowledge”?

    From my observations of reality, state-licensed attorney-criminals and judge-criminals have ruined America for a fee by clearing the “legal” pathways to creating sanctuary cities, permitting open borders flooded with Biden-invited foreign-nationals and now, possibly, willfully and legally allowing undocumented foreign-citizens to be U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators, such as Somali Omar and Canada Cruz.

    I see too many unaccounted state-licensed attorneys as liars for hire and pimps of Lady Justice; why haven’t state-licensed attorney-criminals “Joke and Coke” Biden been disbarred for televised foreign pay-to-play bribery schemes and Hunter’s evidentiary “laptop from hell” and Hunter’s decommission from the Navy for evidentiary cocaine consumption, et al? ANSWER: Legal profession’s apathy and fear of reprisals of convicted felons, I surmise.

    If “the fix is in” and your case, AJ, is, in fact, dismissed for any “reason”, don’t be crestfallen. My belief is that there isn’t a court in the land that will fully identify Obama or Omar or Cruz, et al, because their personal livelihoods and lives would become targets for assassination for interrupting the nationally syndicated policy of “relying on lying” that began on 08-28-08: and continues to the present time. This is not some conspiracy theory but, rather, this is a conspiracy reality.


    Because of all political issues to come before our 50 states since 1789, there is always some dissension from state to state (i.e., some states restrict abortion and driver’s licenses issued to illegals and civil unions, etc., while other states do not make those restrictions), except for the nation-wide Obama (and Omar?) Constitutional eligibility issue. Every single court in every single state has consistently refused to investigate and litigate Obama’s Constitutional ineligibility, and Omar’s identity and eligibility may likely avoid court investigation and litigation as well. Every court in the land apparently believes that the stakes are too high and that being honest will prove to be an honest mistake. It is “judicial checkmate” due to criminal Obama’s “black male blackmail” over our nation’s court and election systems…unless times have changed, AJ, and you prevail in this case over this nationally syndicated policy of “relying on lying” 08-28-08- TODAY.
    EXHIBIT B: >>>

    Every legal U.S. citizen who marginalizes you now with mean monikers (“islamaphobic”, “white supremist”, “kook”, et al), death threats, doxxing, slander and libel, et al, reveals their private internal desire to deface our election process (by possibly promoting candidate fraud) and displays their errant desire to be a co-criminal along with Omar and our nation’s “sindicated” court and election systems. You do not want to be a co-criminal, so you now report this “Theft Left” Omar character to the proper authorities. You may feel you are all alone in this court challenge because your fellow GOP colleagues duck this challenge to avoid their being marginalized as a “birther”, yet, millions of Americans are behind your lonely efforts and convictions, AJ: There is never a right way to do a wrong thing nor a wrong time to do the right thing! – JD Mooers

    In summary, this case is more about a trial of our nation’s court and election systems; you can’t fail, AJ, if the court and election system fails you and all of America herein. Even if the court does discover Omar has attempted candidate fraud herein, will the court and election systems go on to indict and punish her, or will they drop that ball for all legal U.S. citizens as well?

    JD Mooers, PE, MBA, MADE IN USA

    [Photo] Benjamin Mooers
    [Photo] John Mooers/Dad (top row far left) B24 gunner
    [Photo] Jonathan Mooers Corps of Engineers

    1. It is BAD when our leaders commit crimes (Hillary “RICO” Clinton, “Joke and Coke” Biden, “Osama” Obama, Susan “Lie-A-Minute” Rice, et al)
    2. It is WORSE when those leaders, conmen Congressmen and “corporrupt media” collude to cover-up those crimes.
    3. It is WORST when the “good guys” (DOJ, FBI, judges and state-licensed attorneys, law enforcement, et al) REFUSE to prosecute those crimes.
    4. Yet, the WORST CRIME OF THEM ALL is when We the People on Main Street USA, YOU and ME, REFUSE, REFUSE, REFUSE TO HOLD
    A criminal is one who refuses to obey and follow existing prescribed laws.

  3. Email I forwarded to AJ Kern, et al, this morning, before calling her and encouraging her for 37 minutes to stand-up against stand-down U.S. citizenship enforcement:

    SUBJECT: MO: got U.S. citizenship?

    Thank you, Sharon Rondeau of The Post & Email, for this public service announcement on your free premier fingertip-accessible website:

    Thank you, AJ Kern, for your very detailed and painstaking effort to determine, for all legal U.S. citizens, if Ilhan Omar is, in indisputable fact, a naturalized U.S. citizen.

    I’m 73, born in and lived in USA all my life as a descendant of the first Mooers immigrant to arrive in America in 1638, Edmund Mooers:

    Per my observations of reality, from Truman to Trump, America’s election process is intentionally fraught with fraud, including voter fraud (dead voters listed on some state voting rolls, et al), candidate fraud (ineligible unvetted candidates Obama, Kamala, Ted Cruz, Ilhan Omar, et al) and election fraud (Zuckerbucks to buy-off election workers, private paid ballot boxes, stand-down law enforcement, unchecked and secretive “honor system” candidacy affidavits, hackable voting machines, et al).

    These smiley faces are largely to blame for our nation’s ever-vexing voter/candidate/election frauds, including the former President of the National Association of Secretaries of State, Beth Chapman (see attached SOS Sighted and Cited letter to Beth Chapman, et al, in 2014):

    REMEMBER 08-28-08:
    REMEMBER 08-28-09: Sharon Rondeau/The Post & Email begins publishing discoveries of fraud, including Obama’s candIDate/presIDent/ex-presIDent fraud, EVERYDAY to the present time

    In my opinion, Ilhan Omar (“MOUTH OFF OMAR”; mouthing off, that’s her MO! – JD Mooers ), as a mouthy member of the “Squalid Squad” in Congress, is a candidate for the gallows along with every single U.S Government employee and election official who assists Ilhan in making American values and American elections a world-class mockery. Since “the mouth is a mirror to the mind”, as the saying goes, it is criminal that any foreign-born American-hating agitators, particularly those with no proof of legal U.S. citizenship, are allowed into the highest offices of our land! Therefore, any resistance by any U.S. citizen to now legally requiring every single Congressional candidate from duly including indisputable verifiable U.S. citizenship attached to his/her candidacy papers, is to be punished as a criminal under existing prescribed laws. Such punishment is long, long, long overdue! And every single national election vote must now be made as secure as a $1,000 bill deposited in any U.S. bank! Are you awake or a woke? – JD Mooers

    image.png [ ]

    To be indifferent to Ilhan’s reported manipulative (RICO?) marriage to her brother, and her reported illegal campaign funds spending, and her obviously calculated anti-American callousness, and her reported candIDate fraud herein = “In FRAUD We Trust” by each SOS accepting “honor system” affidavits being replaced with “honor fraud system” affidavits of candidacies! – JD Mooers

    In 1787, some 46 males met in virtual secrecy inside Independence Hall in Philadelphia, during April to September, to frame our U.S. Constitution. On the matter of citizenship, John Jay was an outspoken advocate of no foreigners being allowed to be a future U.S President or U.S. VP or U.S. Senator or U.S. Representative. John Jay invented and promoted “natural born Citizen” as America’s model President-citizen (and later VP-citizen as well in 1804) as a formal check against foreign-citizen and foreign-allegiance U.S. President’s and U.S. VP’s from usurping the U.S. Constitution and, thus, undermining, or cancelling altogether, all the risks and sacrifices the First Citizens and the Founding Fathers endured during the American Revolution to gift us today with our nation’s freedoms and avenues of self-determination. >>> >>> >>>

    Today, We the People on Main Street USA, you and me, including activists like AJ Kern herein, must protect against the erosion of U.S. citizenship from otherwise wink-and-nod politicians and careless election officials who passively, or actively, refuse to honor their oaths of office to objectively ensure these citizenship protections for us!

    Good Luck, AJ Kern, America needs your leadership,

    JD Mooers, PE, MBA, MADE IN USA

    “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” – John Adams

    Keeping an open mind means well, until it means “in one ear and out the other” ! – JD Mooers

    I believe that “Plagiarist President” Biden is taking credit for Trump’s second term in office, as undisclosed by today’s guilty-knowledge Democriminals and Republicons alike, via their complicit lust for whoresome politics over wholesome election disclosure policies. – JD Mooers

    STOP fingerpointing START fingerprinting! – JD Mooers

  4. The scheduled hearing is to dismiss the lawsuit.

    As with birth certificates, candidates are not required to submit, and cannot be compelled to submit, naturalization records.

        1. This is not a Presidential eligibility case. Omar obtained her U.S. Citizenship fraudulently. Then she entered into public office fraudulently. The law calls for her loss of US Citizenship AND deportation.

        2. No one said this was a presidential eligibility case. It is, however, like a presidential eligibility case because it will be dismissed before the start of discovery.

          If Kern or anyone else believes Omar obtained her citizenship fraudulently, as always, the burden is on the accuser to provide evidence.

      1. Anyone can ask, and candidates are free to say no or ignore the request.

        But lawsuits that make this demand will get dismissed.