ACTION

Obama eligibility case lives!
Supreme Court's own precedent cited in new demand for resolution.
Published: 08/15/2014 at 9:52 PM

http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/obama-eligibility-case-lives/

The question of Barack Obama’s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office under the Constitution’s “natural born”citizen requirement is once again being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has refused to hear a number of previous cases. Judges have ruled Obama’s eligibility is a political question that is not for the courts to decide. They have argued the plaintiffs didn’t have “standing,” the
requirement that they have sustained or will sustain direct injury or harm that can be redressed by a court.

Now, however, a plaintiff has surfaced who claims he has suffered a specific and individual injury, the $90 he is seeking to have returned by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The president’s eligibility is beingquestioned in a friend-of-the-court brief submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court by the constitutional experts at William J. Olson, P.C. and the United States Justice Foundation.

They are asking the high court to take up the case of Christopher John Rudy, a registered patent attorney who paid to the Patent and Trademark Office “fee increases” totaling $90 under the America Invents Act, “purportedly enacted into law in September 2011 by Congress and the president.” Rudy sued for a refund “on the ground that the AIA was invalid, having been signed into law by Barack Obama, a person who, was not a ‘natural born citizen,’ and thus, was
ineligible to hold the office of president of the United States.”

The courts rejected his claim, insisting they had no authority to look into Obama’s eligibility. The law firms’ brief explained Rudy’s argument. “Until now, the question of President Obama’s qualifications as a ‘natural born citizen’ has been dodged by the judiciary because those challenging his eligibility had not suffered any personal injury compensable by a court – and thus lacked ‘legal’ standing. There is no such barrier in this case because the patent
attorney suffered an out-of-pocket loss of $90 because of the new law signed by President Obama.”