The Judge in Georgia has NOT ordered President Obama to appear in court

[Tx4obama]

Widely-reported misinformation on Georgia hearing

I was very surprised to see news organizations repeating birther nonsense, such as in this article: President Obama Ordered To Hearing In Atlanta About His Citizenship at the WFMY TV News web site. (The article doesn’t support the headline, by the way.) The respected Columbus Ledger-Enquirer echoed the same idea in article by Chuck Williams

A Georgia judge has ordered President Barack Obama to appear in court in Atlanta Thursday for a hearing on a complaint that says Obama isn’t a natural-born citizen and can’t be president.

It’s totally bogus. Orly Taitz got a blank subpoena form signed by Judge Malihi from a State web site and served it on Obama’s attorney. While the Judge has so far refused defense motions to quash the subpoena, the Judge has not issued any order for Obama to appear, nor could he. An administrative law judge in Georgia lacks the authority to compel testimony; that takes an order from the Superior Court.

I am very disappointed that the media would repeat birther nonsense like this. Even the birthers are backing off from this rumor.

SNIP
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/01/widely-reported-misinformation-on-georgia-hearing/

================

Related...

* * * * * The judge has NOT issued an 'order' * * * * *

See comments on the links below

Comment #12: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002209438#post12

Comment #21: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002209438#post21

Comment #14: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002206927#post14


p.s. Many news agencies have gotten the facts wrong and have spun the story into something it is not.

Please help to get the TRUTH out - especially to even the DUers that might not have heard the facts, thanks

[dipsydoodle]

1. Thanks for the effort in finding that.

K & R.

[lillypaddle]

2. K&R n/t

[no_hypocrisy]

3. How could a judge sign a blank subpoena?

Unless the signature is forged.

Or if the judge DID sign a blank subpoena, s/he would be facing sanctions, perhaps impeachment.

[COLGATE4]

4. It's not that uncommon,

particularly in Administrative Law cases. It depends on the size of the court and depends on the conduct of attorneys as Officers of the Court to not abuse it - as has clearly been done here.

[tanyev]

5. Can Orly get in trouble for that?

Doesn't sound egzackly legal.

[fredamae]

6. I wonder if orly can be charged

under stalking and/or harassment laws?
Pres Obama Has provided anything and Everything any other person would/could/should have to Prove his birth was in fact IN the US.

This is Well "beyond the beyond" at this point.

[Adelante]

7. Details

Sorry to pimp my own blog, but here is some useful information in responding to this insanity around the Internets.

http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=20882

I hope it helps.

Thank you.

[klook]

14. First time I've seen your term "Birfistan"

Very clever!

Thanks for the link to your blog.

[Hawkowl]

8. Separation of powers

Judges have no authority to order the President to appear in a court. Only Congress has the right to impeach the President.

[FedUp_Queer]

11. In one of the stupidest decisions of all time...

The Supreme Court in Clinton v. Jones ruled that a person can bring a civil law suit against a sitting president for acts prior to his taking office and does not interfere with his duties as president. The Court ruled 9-0 that such a suit could go forward. Consistent with that, there is no legal problem with sending a subpoena to the president in this matter. Impeachment and suing are separate things. Was the Supreme Court wrong-headed and stupid when it did that? Sure as hell was. Is that the law of the land? Sure as hell is.

Who can actually sign a subpoena has always struck me as a weird thing. I, as an attorney in New York, can sign a subpoena compelling someone's testimony...without judicial approval. That always struck me (and continues to strike me) as odd. There is nothing against a general authority to subpoena the President (given the decision surrounding the Jones decision). However, is that a dumb decision? Yeah...I think a person should have to wait until a president leaves office to bring a civil suit. As we saw with the Paula Jones debacle, it's too damn distracting. This Orly Taitz crap seems worse.

Here's a wiki-blurb on the subject. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._Jones

[Hawkowl]

13. Interesting

I wasn't thinking about civil actions.

[FedUp_Queer]

15. When you read the Court's ruling

you have to wonder where they were living to make such statements.

[slimpickins]

17. not trying to impeach

The judge does however have the authority to uphold and enforce Georgia state voter law, which he IS doing. No suit has been brought, this is simply a Georgia man exercising his right to verify a candidates eligibility before he goes on the ballot. The judge has merely upheld the law, and denied the attempts made by Obama's lawyers to have the case thrown out. Simple as that.

[Ikonoklast]

18. I guess you are not only completely wrong, but also no longer among the living.

Muerte by MIRT.

[jwirr]

9. Is what orly did a crime? It should be.

[bathroommonkey76]

10. Did you contact WFMY? n/t

[xocet]

12. Thanks for taking the time to correct the false impression that the other stories generated. n/t

[Scurrilous]

16. K & R