Someone recently asked about a full listing of all the birther cases that have been dismissed, to count up the number of judges who have considered - and rejected - birther claims.

Based in large part on DocC's Docket* I've created a sort of Birther Case Standings List- containing:
--Case Caption (and plaintiff's full name)
--Court, Case Number, with Justia Docket link (or other, where available)
--Dismissal Order, with link to Order where available
--Appeal Dismissal Order, with link when available
--Supreme Court Docket showing application/writ denied, with link
--Whether Obama's Attorneys defended the case

*The primary difference b/w this and DocC's docket is that I (a) didn't include links to any pleadings - just the orders dismissing the case; (b) added a couple cases and additional information/links to a couple cases; (c) added in the McCain "birther"/eligibility cases, and (d) did not include a couple cases on that docket that aren't really birther cases (however iChinge-ingly-interesting).

See BIRTHER CASE LIST (PDF). By my count, the "score" is Birthers-0; Constitution-54 in the trial courts, with two (FOIA) cases still pending.

And, please, please, feel free to send corrections and/or additions.

~~~
Now. We keep seeing these short (relatively speaking) string cites of birther cases with parentheticals. What would be great fun (to true geeks only) would be to create a parenthetical of ALL the dismissed birther cases .... in proper Blue Book Form, of course.

Just an idea ....

beautiful thanks Tes

Excellent work. However, I am beginning to worry, Tes, that this is all you do now that the honeymoon is over!

Great job, Tes, thank you.

Wow. Great job! And it now dawns on me that you're the author of "What's your Evidence."

Awe.

Yikes, this is awesome! That "someone" was me. 0 for 54, eh? That's a batting percentage of... what... .000? Not bad!

As FYI:

The chart has been tweaked/updated a bit to correct a few typos, reorganize just a bit, and - most importantly - to add an actual "scorecard" to the top of the page.

Enjoy

And, if you count actual dispositive rulings - vs cases - the score is even "better" for the Constitution, since multiple plaintiffs filed motions for reconsideration, and appeals, etc.

What an outstanding job, Tes! Thank you so much for this!

thanks ......wow...54... I had no idea that there were that many. I wonder how much in donations these shysters have raked in. I would think the donors would begin to wake up and smell the coffee. Maybe the numbers will make their way round the web and people will wake up to the frauds who've been taking their money.

I'm still not sure we have them ALL - am still trying to track down info on a few other cases referenced. I haven't listed them because I can only find someone TALKING about them, but haven't found any "official" record that they exist. E.g., it was reported just a few days ago that Sullivan has filed another case, alleging treason, in NC. Soon as I find some official confirmation of that case (and a couple others), I'll be adding to the list. Also, I didn't include all of Taitz' various quo warrantos and motions/applications filed with SCOTUS. From one perspective, they should be counted because ... she attempted to use Court to further her campaign. However, the documents weren't accepted/weren't actually ever even filed with the Court, so I did not include them. If we were to add those types of things, the number would be up around 60+ I believe.

Chart has been updated to add in the newly dismissed American Grand Jury Tennessee Presentment.
(See sig line for link)

Tes, Bravo! This is a great piece of work. I would have guessed no more than 30 cases. Talk about Epic Fail.

Ok folks. Thanks in very large part to LeonardApple, the chart has been updated yet again.

A. RECAP links added, where available.
This means that folks can click on the RECAP link and access all the pleadings that have been uploaded to RECAP from PACER -- for free.

This was LeonardApple's (great) suggestion -- and not only did he make a great suggestion, but he HELPED me locate all the links.

B. Thomas v. Hoseman - MS Case Added.
Thanks to LeonardApple, again, for leading me to the two Thomas v. Hoseman cases (filed in HI and in MS).
So - score has changed again. make that 0-56.

Thank you thank you LeonardApple

Updated chart is in link below (sig).

You both rock.

Ditto.

Um... someone filed a small claims birther suit against Obama?

That's actually the venue which has the highest possible chance of success for a birther plaintiff. That guy deserves an award of some sort!

Am I understanding your chart correctly? It looks to me that there have only been 3 cases where Obama has had any kind of legal representation - and in the other cases, did the defendant have to hire a private attorney or did the DOJ (or other appropriate state or national entity) provide them with one?

Not quite. I added that column to address the fallacy that birthers continue to spread that "Obama has spent millions of dollars to hide his BC" -- when, in fact, Obama (or his campaign) has spent money only to defend three cases (of which I'm aware), which could have cost no where near that amount of money.

In the remainder of the cases ...

(a) Obama was not even a defendant. There are multiple cases that were brought against Secretaries of States or Election Boards, etc., and that did not name Obama as a defendant.

(b) Obama was a defendant, but the Court dismissed the case before he filed a response. There are several cases where this occurred. In some of them, the court dismissed the case sua sponte before any defendant responded; in at least a few others, the court dismissed the case after some defendant - but not Obama - responded. (I may end up adding that info to the chart later.)

(c) The case was filed after January 21, 2009 and the DOJ (not Obama's attorneys) defended the case. For example, in Barnett, Obama was a defendant, and defendants were required to respond. However, the DOJ, rather than Obama's personal (or campaign) attorneys, defended the case.

But the birfers are actually talking about the millions of dollars it took to put Obots through law school, so that they could then be planted as law clerks into the very courts where birfers would, in the future, file their suits. That isn't cheap!

muldrake. Didn't you get the HQ memo that we're not to confirm this?

DAMMIT!!! Has there been another leak?

Tes this case was going to be the one to end them all according to Rod Class and Carl Swensson . this is about the fringed US flag and all that other corporation stuff. I think that this is relevant.
Regards ...........Dick

Link(s) please. A fringe case, eh? What part of epic fail do these morons not understand?

Is this the same case that is discussed in this thread? viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2773

Thats is the one about Buess The one I was talking about is on http://www.riseupforamerica.com/rodclassvsjusticedept/update110509.html
so I guess there are two. Sorry if they have been mentioned before.
Regards ................Dick