The Kerchner v. Obama/Congress Case Is Not the Same as the Berg v. Obama Case Despite the OBOT Minions' Talking Points Blogging/Claiming That It Is

On June 29, 2010, the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals will receive for decision the Kerchner et al. v. Obama/Congress et al. appeal to that Court of the Federal District Court's dismissal of the case for what it said was lack of standing and political question.  Putative President Obama's supporters are out and about arguing that the Kerchner v. Obama/Congress case is exactly like the Berg v. Obama case and therefore the Third Circuit Court of Appeals should affirm the District Court's dismissal of the case for lack of standing. This is not only an incredible statement but an outright lie. First, while Berg focused only on the place of birth issue, Kerchner argues that Obama is not and cannot be President no matter where he was born because not being born to a citizen father which made him born a subject of a foreign power, he is not and cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Second, Berg sued candidate Obama before the general election but the Kerchner plaintiffs sued both President Elect Obama (after Congress confirmed him but before Chief Justice Roberts swore him in) and putative President Obama (after the Chief Justice swore him in). Third, Berg did not sue Congress but Kerchner did. Fourth, Berg did not argue like Kerchner does that based on the plaintiffs' individual Fifth Amendment right to protection of their life, liberty, safety, security, tranquility, and property, which protection they do not receive from a person who is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and therefore is an illegal and illegitimate President and Commander in Chief of the Military. This lack of protection from their President and Commander in Chief to which each particular plaintiff is entitled under our Constitutional covenant between the People and the Government as conceived by the Founders and Framers is more than sufficient to show the Kerchner plaintiffs have standing. Fifth, there is also so much more to the Kerchner case. If one were to fully read both the Berg case and the Kerchner case, there is no way that one could honestly say that the cases are the same and that the Kerchner plaintiffs therefore do not have standing. Rather, such a reading will clearly show that Obama’s supporters are fully engaged in not only wishful thinking but also outright deceit. Only one driven by animosity or the deceit of party spirit which rears its head in various explicit and hidden forms rather than by the desire to protect the Constitution and the Constitutional Republic can come to the incredible conclusion that the Kerchner and Berg cases are the same.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
June 19, 2010
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
####