Georgia Judge Denies Obama's Motion To Quash Taitz Subpoena In Ballot Eligibility Case

California attorney Orly Taitz has been the butt of many jokes and roundly criticized by the mainstream media for her dogged pursuit of proving that Barack Obama was never eligible to serve as president of the United States because he is not a natural born citizen. After dozens of lawsuits, Taitz finally found a judge in Georgia who is allowing one of her eligibility challenges to be heard on the merits. Judge Michael Malihi first denied a motion to dismiss Taitz' complaint filed in Georgia challenging his right to appear on the 2012 Democratic primary ballot for the state of Georgia. Today, Judge Malihi denied a motion filed by Obama's attorneys seeking to quash subpoenas she served on Obama to appear at a hearing on January 26, 2012 and produce original documents Taitz has asked the President to produce, including his birth certificate, social security application, aliases and school records. Here's the text of Judge Malihi's Order:

Defendant, President Barack Obama, a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination for the office of the President of the United States, has filed a motion to quash the subpoena compelling his attendance at the hearing on January 26, 2012.

In support of his motion, Defendant argues that "if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as President of the United States" to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, Defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend. Defendant's motion suggests that no President should be compelled to attend a Court hearing. This may be correct. But Defendant has failed to enlighten the Court with any legal authority. Specifically, Defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is "unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony... [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party's preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced." Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(5).

Defendant further alludes to a defect in service of the subpoena. However, the Court's rules provide for service of a subpoena upon a party, by serving the party's counsel of record. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(4). Thus, the argument regarding service is without merit.

Accordingly, Defendant's motion to quash is denied.

SO ORDERED, this 20th day of January, 2012.

I don't see President Obama's attorneys allowing him to comply with this state judge's order for one minute. I anticipate that an emergency appeal of this ruling is already in the works. It would be hard to imagine a state court judge forcing Obama to produce documents and otherwise prove his eligibility to serve as president when no federal court judge to date has been willing to take that step, even if that is what is required of them as judges to uphold the oath they took to uphold the U.S. Constitution.