664 F.3d 774
9th Cir.2011Background
- Plaintiffs allege Obama is constitutionally ineligible to serve as President under Article II, §1, cl. 4; suit filed Jan 20, 2009, the day Obama was sworn in.
- District Court dismissed constitutional claims and requests for declaratory/injunctive relief for lack of standing; quo warranto, FOIA, and RICO claims also dismissed.
- District Court divided plaintiffs into six categories: active and former military, state representatives, federal taxpayers, relatives of Obama, and political candidates.
- Court assumed potential standing for political candidates but found redressability lacking since relief would remove the President, a non-justiciable political question.
- Ninth Circuit affirmed: agreed the District Court properly dismissed for lack of Article III standing and also upheld dismissal of quo warranto, FOIA, and RICO claims; emergency mandamus petition denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge presidential eligibility under Article III | Freese, others claim concrete injury from oath; others rely on competitive standing. | No concrete injury; grievances are generalized and too speculative. | No standing for any plaintiff; amended and unamended complaints fail to show injury-in-fact, causation, and redressability. |
| Quo warranto venue for challenge to presidential office | DC venue is proper under DC Code, but Attorney General/US Attorney have not moved. | DC proper venue; federal courts lack original jurisdiction absent statutory basis. | Quo warranto claims properly dismissed for improper venue; DC District Court appropriate venue per DC Code. |
| FOIA claims against individuals | Requests for records from various individuals. | FOIA applies to agencies, not to individuals. | FOIA claims dismissed for failure to state a claim; individuals are not proper FOIA defendants. |
| RICO claims against several defendants | Plaintiffs reserved RICO claims for later amendment with pleaded facts. | No pleaded RICO allegations in the operative complaint. | RICO claims dismissed; no stateable RICO pleading against non-Obama defendants. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requires injury, causation, redressability)
- Schlesinger v. Reservists Comm. to Stop the War, 418 U.S. 208 (1974) (generalized grievances insufficient for standing)
- United States v. Richardson, 418 U.S. 166 (1974) (taxpayer standing limited; generalized grievances inadequate)
- Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83 (1968) (taxpayer standing for Establishment Clause claims with nexus to spending)
- Owen v. Mulligan, 640 F.2d 1130 (9th Cir. 1981) (competitive standing requires ongoing injury affecting election)