(Untitled)

[mr_quackenbush]

So thanks to mcpreacher i've gotten fascinated by this case in pennsylvania federal court where some dood who wanted hillary clinton to be president has asked the court to order an injunction against obama preventing him from running for president and against the DNC for nominating him

Comments

[sealwhiskers]

As far as I understand it, Obama presented a birth certificate showing that he was in fact born in Hawaii, and that certificate was deemed legit by the court. It doesn't matter if he was an Indonesian citizen or not when he was a kid, not from an American citizenship standpoint at least. If you're born in the US (and Hawaii had been part of the US for 4 years at the time of Obama's birth), then that's it.

[mr_quackenbush]

looking at the docket, i don't think it even got that far. according to factcheck.org, obama's birth certificate is legit for all reasonable purposes one would need a birth certificate for, and I assume that means eligibility for elected office, but they haven't done anything in the court case other than move to dismiss the suit.

[alright_fine]

See 36(a)(4): If a matter is not admitted, the answer must specifically deny .... You can't just not respond, and filing a motion to dismiss or a motion for a protective order isn't an answer denying the requested admissions. That's my guess, anyway.

[mr_quackenbush]

That's the part that confused me. It doesn't seem clear whether the specifically enumerated requests for admission have to denied in a specifically enumerated fashion or if they can be denied en masse. because both the motions to dismiss and for the protective order contain blank assertions that all of Berg's relevant claims are false

[alright_fine]

The rule says a. there has to be an answer, and b. the admissions must be *specifically* denied. I would read that to mean that a motion filed separately is not an answer to the request for discovery, and that en masse denials would not mean the requirement for specificity expressly stated in the rule

[mr_quackenbush]

I thought 13 and 21 were just the reply from the plaintiff and his motion to have them admitted. Does their being there mean that they've been ruled on by the judge? I thought the only ruling so far was number 4 and that all the other items were still awaiting judgment.

can you tell i'm antsy to go to law school?

[korgmeister]

It's kinda interesting considering there was controversy over McCain's citizenship and country of birth, too.

[glaucon]

apparently, the case has been resolved