Failed Birther attorney Mario Apuzzo has a blog with the amusing name Natural Born Citizen – A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers. Apuzzo began his blog back in December 2008 just prior to the time the time he filed a lawsuit on behalf of another Birther Charles Kerchner and other plaintiffs against then President Elect Obama, Congress, Vice President Cheney and others. I recently posted what I thought to be great advice for Mr. Apuzzo who is apparently considered by Birthers to be one of the two or three best researchers in the movement. I suggested in a comment to his long scathing post against the decision by Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi that Apuzzo should contact Charles Tisdale in Virginia and offer to represent him on an appeal for Tisdale v Obama. et. al. to the 4th Circuit. This case was filed in US District Court in Richmond, VA last month. Judge Gibney dismissed the case quickly for failure to sate a claim but he also took time to say that the premise of the case was silly and that by Wong Kim Ark and other cases president Obama was a natural born citizen regardless of the citizenship of his father. So here is the perfect case for Apuzzo to leave his fortified shelter of the blogosphere and give the 4th Circuit the “right answers”. Apuzzo had apparently never heard of the Tisdale v Obama case. I had to give him the link (twice). He has read Judge Gibney’s decision and of course he disagrees with it.
It has been interesting to watch the evolution of Mario’s reliance on his incorrect interpretation of Minor v Happersett, which he now touts as the defining case for the definition of a natural born citizen. You would think this important case would have been referenced in his one and only eligibility case. However I checked the Original Complaint in Kerchner v Obama filed on Inauguration Day in 2009, the Amended Complaint, filed on the following day, and the Second Amended Complaint, filed on February 20,2009. The Minor case is never cited nor even mentioned in any of the complaints. Even on his blog he only mentions Minor v Happersett in passing an an article on January 8, 2009 and then not again until June 2009. My theory is that like all the other Birther attorneys the “Two Citizen Parent” de Vattel nonsense was invented out of thin air in late 2008 (primarily by Leo Donofrio) when it was becoming more apparent every day that then candidate Obama was born in Hawaii and every piece of evidence supported that conclusion. The Birthers had to have a fall back position and a little Google work gave it to them. After the release of the LFBC the attachment to the nonsense theory became necessary and they began openly lying about Minor v Happersett out of complete desperation.
Apuzzo’s lack of understanding of the important cases on citizenship is nowhere better illustrated than during this appearance on Momma E’s Radio Rebels program on BlogTalk Radio in early 2009:https://sites.google.com/site/landoftheobots/files/MommaE_Apuzzo_Wong_Kim_Ark.mp3?attredirects=0&d=1
Momma E had a better understanding of Wong Kim Ark than either Apuzzo or Kerchner!
I could write a long rebuttal of Mr. Apuzzo’s flawed reasoning on what the Minor v Happersett and the Wong Kim Ark cases have to say about the meaning of “natural born citizen” as used in Article II of the Constitution and elsewhere but why do that when John Woodman has already done that in a very well written article on his blog titled Why the Birthers Lost. (See the comments for the good stuff.)
I don’t think Mario will take my advice on the Tisdale case. First it would be money out of his pocket or out of his benefactor Charlie Kerchner’s pocket. Kerchner would rather spend his money on full page ads in the Moonie Times with silly Venn Diagrams. Second, I don’t think Mario is up to enduring another humiliating loss in the courts. He barely escaped sanctions in the 3rd Circuit when he appealed the lower court dismissal of Kerchner v Obama and the court was not amused when he failed to cite another case that was directly on point, Berg v Obama that had been before the same court just a few months before. Some of Mario’s best legal work was his groveling before the 3rd circuit in his reply to the Order to Show Cause (OSC) in that case.