Andy Martin has just responded to the judge’s ruling on his Lawsuit, PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, requesting access to Obama’s birth certificate and other records on file with the Hawaii Health Department.
“THIS COURT TREATED THE EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AS A MOTION SEEKING EMERGENCY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AS
PLAINTIFF WAS SEEKING TO OBTAIN THE BIRTH RECORDS FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA.
FIRST, THE COURT POINTS OUT THAT THE ISSUANCE OF A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEEKS EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF.
IN HAWAII, A 3 PRONG TEST IS APPLIED IN DETERMINING WHETHER PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF SHOULD BE GRANTED AS
STATED IN LIFE OF THE LAND V ARIYOSHI, 59 HAW. 156 (1978). THE 3 ELEMENTS ARE:
1. IS THE PLAINTIFF LIKELY TO PREVAIL ON THE MERITS?
2. DOES THE BALANCE OF IRREPARABLE HARM FAVOR THE ISSUANCE OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER OR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF,
3. DOES THE PUBLIC INTEREST SUPPORT THE GRANTING OF THE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF SOUGHT?
AFTER REVIEWING THE PLEADINGS, THE MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, THE MEMORANDA OPPOSING THE MOTION, THE EXHIBITS,
AND OTHER WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, AND CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL AND PLAINTIFF, PRO SE, THE COURT FINDS AS
BASED ON THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED, THE COURT FINDS THAT IT IS UNLIKELY THAT PLAINTIFF WILL PREVAIL
ON THE MERITS AS IT APPEARS THAT THE PLAINTIFF DOES NOT HAVE A DIRECT AND TANGIBLE INTEREST IN THE VITAL STATISTIC
RECORDS BEING SOUGHT, NAMELY THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF PRESIDENT OBAMA. PLAINTIFF ALSO DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE
CATEGORY OF PERSONS WHO MAY BE ENTITLED TO THE RECORDS AS ENUMERATED IN HRS 338-18(B). IN ADDITION, HRS 92-13
PROVIDES THAT DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT RECORDS IS NOT REQUIRED WHICH, PURSUANT TO STATE LAW, ARE PROTECTED FROM
REGARDING THE SECOND ELEMENT OF IRREPARABLE HARM, THE COURT FINDS THAT PLAINTIFF HAS NOT PRESENTED ANY EVIDENCE TO
THIS COURT THAT IRREPARABLE HARM WILL OCCUR IF THE RECORDS ARE NOT PROVIDED TO THE PLAINTIFF.
IN ADDITION, THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST SUPPORTS THE GRANTING OF THE
RELIEF SOUGHT AND THERE IS A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD RATHER PRESERVE THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF VITAL
THEREFORE, THE EMERGENCY MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
IN ADDITION, THE COURT GRANTS DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE
PRIOR RULING AS WELL AS FOR THE REASONS RAISED IN THE MOTION AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDA, INCLUDING LACK OF STANDING
AND INSUFFICIENT SERVICE OF PROCESS ON THE DEFENDANTS.
DEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL TO PREPARE ORDER.”
Andy Martin’s response:
“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
INTERNET POWERHOUSE ANDY MARTIN PLANS TO APPEAL DISMISSAL OF BARACK OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE LAWSUIT, SAYS HE HAS NOT YET RECEIVED A COPY
MARTIN SAYS JUDICIAL SYSTEM REFLECTS “CALLOUS DISREGARD” FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
(NEW YORK)(November 21, 2008) For those of you who are not familiar with the peculiar highways and byways of the judicial process, welcome to the strange ways of the court system in Hawai’i. Apparently my lawsuit in a Honolulu state court has been dismissed.
Unfortunately, I have not seen a copy of the decision. Despite the significance of the court order, I was not given a courtesy notice when it was entered in Honolulu, apparently late Wednesday, although I was in Honolulu all day on Wednesday.
Thursday all day I was traveling back to New York and was unavailable. I did not get back to New York until 8:00 A.M. Friday.
I was alerted by a reader’s e-mail that something had happened, and went to the Honolulu Advertiser’s web site where I found a complete story, http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081121/NEWS20/811210355/1001/localnewsfront.
Obviously I was unable to respond to phone calls while in the air, and when I checked my e-mails today the Advertiser reporter had not left a phone number to call him back.
The Court did not fax my office a copy and so I have no immediate way of seeing a copy of the decision. I assume the Advertiser’s news report is a fair summary of the decision.
Depending on what the response is to a fund appeal, I will certainly appeal this decision to the Hawai’i Intermediate Court of Appeals. The trial court’s interpretation of the relevant statute appears to be a wooden reading of the law. The claim that there is a lack of historical significance to the birth certificate of a president of the United States is a classic example of how utter nonsense can exist in the judicial system.
I will solicit input from my audience as to whether they feel that pursuit of the appeal is a worthwhile venture and will proceed accordingly.
I understand how 150 million Americans are frustrated by the callous disregard which the court system has shown for access to vital, basic information about Barack Obama, the “mystery man” who has been elected president by the “Mainstream Media of the United States.”
However other than this mild criticism, I believe it is more appropriate to proceed through the judicial process, and that is the course I intend to follow on the issue of access to Barack Obama’s original, typewritten 1961 original birth certificate.”
Read more from Andy Martin here: