UPDATE: 10-25-08 - The federal judge dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that Berg, an ordinary U.S. citizen, does not have legal standing to challenge the eligibility of a presidential candidate, despite the lack of (and refusal to provide) evidence that Obama is eligible according to the U S. Constitution. Berg says he will challenge this case up to the Supreme Court, if necessary.

Some questions still remain: If "ordinary" citizens do not have legal standing to uphold the Constitution, which is a product of the People that establishes our government and the laws we live by and under, then who does? And why has the Obama campaign refused to release any of the documents that can permanently put the issue to rest?

(End Update)

Amidst the excitement in this election year about a fairly unknown candidate and his promise to the People of “change,” it appears one of the most fundamental aspects of his candidacy has been overlooked by nearly everyone involved. There is currently a civil suit pending in the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania challenging the legality of Barack Obama’s candidacy for the president of the United States. What’s the charge? Apparently, Senator Obama has yet to produce the documents required to prove he is a natural born citizen, and lawyer Philip J. Berg alleges that they most likely do not exist.

Philip J. Berg is a lawyer and a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania. He is also a life-long Democrat and was a Hillary Clinton supporter during this year’s Democrat primaries. Nevertheless, he claims to be filing this lawsuit in order to protect the integrity of the Democrat Party as well as the American People.

Berg’s lawsuit focuses on several points of contention. First he claims that there is evidence that Barack Obama was born in Kenya and his birth was registered in Hawaii upon return to the state. Berg alleges that Obama’s paternal grandmother and other relatives have claimed he was born in Kenya in 1961 and that there may be hospital records in Mombasa, Kenya that verify his birth occurred there. Berg says Barack’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, made a trip to Kenya while she was pregnant and was unable to fly home because she was in the late term of her pregnancy. Berg claims that once the child – Barack Hussein Obama II – was born, the family then flew back to Hawaii and registered his birth with the state offices.

If this is true, Berg says that Barack Obama was not a “natural born” citizen because laws at the time did not confer citizenship on a child born of a non-citizen and a citizen if the “citizen” parent had not established their citizenship for at least five years after the age of 14. Barack’s mother was only 18 years old when Barack was born and therefore could not have met this requirement.

Berg goes on to another point that appears to also have legitimacy. When Mrs. Dunham remarried to Lolo Soetoro, they both took up residence in Indonesia – Soetoro’s native country. At the time, Indonesia did not recognize dual citizenship. In order for a child to attend public schools in Indonesia, they must be a citizen of the country. Barack Obama has openly stated that he spent four years of his childhood in the country and attended school there. Berg claims that his school application lists his name as “Barry Soetoro” and his citizenship as “Indonesia.” If he was indeed adopted or claimed by Lolo Soetoro under Indonesian law, then Obama would have lost his United States citizenship. Upon returning to the United States, he would have to have filed paperwork to become either a naturalized citizen or take an oath of allegiance before his twenty-first birthday to regain his citizenship. Berg alleges that these documents either do not exist or have not been provided because Barack Obama never regained his citizenship.

Even if Obama was naturalized, he is not eligible for the presidency according to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States. The president must be a “natural born” citizen.

If he was an Indonesian citizen and paperwork was not filed on his behalf upon returning to the United States, then he is an illegal alien.

Berg concedes that if Obama simply provided any of the documents that would prove his allegations wrong, he would have no choice but to end his lawsuit. The defendant in the case, Barack Obama (and the Democratic National Committee), has not provided the requested documents that would clear up any issues about citizenship. Instead, the defendants’ lawyers have filed a motion to dismiss the case altogether. The judge has yet to rule on the dismissal. In the formal response to the dismissal that was filed, Berg asks that the court order the requested documents be presented by October 15, 2008.

Barack Obama and the DNC can easily resolve the case by simply presenting the requested documents. By trying to dismiss the case, they make it appear worse than it may actually be. Both parties are now waiting on the judge’s ruling for dismissal. If the case is dismissed, it still leaves the questions unanswered. The only proof of citizenship that Obama has publicly provided is a birth certificate he allegedly obtained from Hawaii in 2007. No news outlet or journalist has yet to see the official documents – or at least publicly acknowledge that they have. The only exception is FactCheck.org, which claims they have physically inspected the birth certificate and it is authentic. But a closer look at their website shows that their “sources” for the story was an application form, a request form, and a story that claims Obama’s birth certificate proves his name is not Mohammed and he is not a Muslim.

Nonetheless, this raises several more questions. If the issue of Barack Obama’s citizenship was being questioned, why would only the FactCheck.org website be shown the document? At first, when the question of Barack’s citizenship was raised, they claimed that he was absolutely a citizen even though they did not see the actual document – just a digitally scanned copy of it. When further questions were raised about forgery, again, only FactCheck.org was able to inspect it in person. No other news outlet or journalist has claimed that they have seen the birth certificate in person and can verify that it is a legitimate document. Even if the birth certificate is authentic, as FactCheck.org claims, it would not prove his citizenship if Berg's allegations about Obama's Indonesian citizenship are correct.

Another question would be, why won’t the Obama campaign simply allow any news agency to inspect his birth certificate and have a qualified expert analyze it for authenticity which can be verified by Hawaiian officials? Why won’t they simply provide the evidence for the civil suit instead of stalling proceedings and filing motions for dismissal? If they have nothing to hide, then why try their best to appear to be hiding something? All of these questions can be very easily settled by simply complying with the court or by disclosing the proper documents to the media.

Barack Obama has chosen to do neither – and again we find ourselves asking a question that appears to be very common lately:

What is Barack Obama trying to hide?

Watch the video here:

Philip J. Berg Explains Lawsuit

Philip J. Berg's Website on the lawsuit:

ObamaCrimes.com

Sources:

Berg v. Obama et al
Report on Obama Birth Certificate Forgery
Born in the U.S.A.
The Constitution of the United States

*For more articles by this author, click here.