Montgomery Blair Sibley, a candidate for President, has brought a quo warranto suit against Barack Obama, arguing that he should be “ousted” from the presidency. A quo warranto petition is made to the courts to ask by what right a person holds office and can be used to remove an office holder who, for example, is ineligible to hold office. The District of Columbia has a statute under which such claims may be presented, but the courts have ruled that only the Attorney General of the United States or the US Attorney for the District of Columbia may bring such suits, as they are the only appropriate representatives of the people.
Sibley presented his objections to Barack Obama’s eligibility to Eric Holder, who of course didn’t file suit against the President. In this action Sibley seeks to press the quo warranto claim action himself, or failing that, to seen a writ of mandamus, an order from the court forcing Holder himself to initiate an action against Obama.
Normally, I wouldn’t have listed this lawsuit as a ballot challenge, but it presents a group of additional claims, one of which is (quoting from the First Amended Petition):
A Writ of Quo Warranto ousting Obama as President of the United States and/or preventing him from holding the franchise of being on the ballot for that office in 2012 insomuch as he is not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States as required by Article II, §1, of the U.S. Constitution.
Mr. Sibley makes a two-pronged claim – first citing Emerich de Vattel in support of a claim that US Presidents must have US citizen parents, and second disputing the President’s birth documentation, largely based on the work of WorldNetDaily volunteer image “experts” including Douglas Vogt and Paul Irey.
Sibley, unsatisfied with the court’s pace in dealing with his claim, filed a writ of mandamus in Circuit seeking to force the District court to Rule. This was denied. The Government has moved (unopposed) to set the deadline for their response for April 2.