(b) The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:

(1) The registrant;

(2) The spouse of the registrant;

(3) A parent of the registrant;

(4) A descendant of the registrant;

(5) A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;

(6) A legal guardian of the registrant;

(7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;

(8) A personal representative of the registrant’s estate;

(9) A person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;

(10) Adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and who need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child’s natural or legal parents;

(11) A person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;

(12) A person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and

(13) A person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.

(c) The department may permit the use [of] the data contained in public health statistical records for research purposes only, but no identifying use thereof shall be made.

(d) Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, type of vital event, and such other data as the director may authorize shall be made available to the public.

(e) The department may permit persons working on genealogy projects access to microfilm or other copies of vital records of events that occurred more than seventy-five years prior to the current year.

(f) Subject to this section, the department may direct its local agents to make a return upon filing of birth, death, and fetal death certificates with them, of certain data shown to federal, state, territorial, county, or municipal agencies. Payment by these agencies for these services may be made as the department shall direct.

(g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:

(1) A person who has a direct and tangible interest in the record but requests a verification in lieu of a certified copy;

(2) A governmental agency or organization who for a legitimate government purpose maintains and needs to update official lists of persons in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities;

(3) A governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks confirmation of a certified copy of any such record submitted in support of or information provided about a vital event relating to any such record and contained in an official application made in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities by an individual seeking employment with, entrance to, or the services or products of the agency or organization;

(4) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of or for purposes of legal proceedings; or

(5) An individual employed, endorsed, or sponsored by a governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record in preparation of reports or publications by the agency or organization for research or educational purposes.
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.htm

I apologise for the error and will remove the observations that incorrectly label him the loon who files frivolous suites.

The Supreme Court has spoken the other cases will find the similar conclusions to deny taking this outlandish claim.

Go back and find something else to waste our time. We’ll be waiting for another hardy laugh.

You’ll note that no one raised this claim until AFTER Obama had the nomination sewed up. Bill Richardson is the son of a Mexican mother and a father who is a US Citizen, but born in Nicaragua; Richardson also spent the first 8 years or so of his childhood in Mexico. Yet not a soul mentioned any problem at all with his “natural born” status.

The standard Supreme Court procedure is that if an application that has been submitted to one Justice and denied, if that same application is resubmitted to another Justice, the 2nd one will refer it to the whole court for “decision”. This is even written into the court rules — they make the litigant submit 10 extra copies the 2nd time around, just so they will have enough to send round to all the Justices.
They do this to save the trouble of the litigant filing his application separately to Justices #3, #4, #5, #6, & #7.

Clarence Thomas probably never even saw the thing — his law clerk would have reviewed it first, and seeing that it was a refiling of an application that had already been denied, prepared whatever memo was needed for Thomas to sign off & send it to the rest of the court.

If Thomas (or his law clerk) didn’t do that, then they would just be creating a headache for whoever the next Justice that Donofrio would try to hit up.

The rest of the Justices wouldn’t look at it either. Their law clerks would read it, note that it should be denied — and then it would end up a big “deny” pile along with whatever other junk needs a rubber stamp denial.

This is NOT about wanting McCain in the White House, or being racist (as most of the Obama supporters respond with), or sour grapes.

The Constitution is the true back bone of America. It is THE document that makes this country as unique and strong as it is.

For Obama to have ALL of his records sealed (and I do mean ALL) and arrogantly not respond properly (like a POTUS ought to respond)and snub the Constitution only strengthens the doubt in many Americans minds. He does have something to hide and he is going to great lengths to keep his status hidden from the public.

Why his supporters don’t see this as magnificently faulty, I just do not understand???? The Constitution of the US is of far greater importance than any single individual’s presidency.

All candidates (including McCain, though he was quite forthcoming with REAL documents and the press had NO PROBLEM covering this end of the eligiblility story) must absolutely submit to laws of our country if he/she wants so much to hold the highest office this country offers.

Honestly, I thought this guy was a fraud all along. I didn’t trust either of his self-indulgent books for my info. I researched him as much as I could (that is finding truthful information about him that wasn’t ass-kissing press coverage). What I found…just another totally phony politician who has been trying to cover up how extremely left he is, has voted, was reared and mentored etc.

What a complete joke. I hope so much that the so-called leaders of this country won’t let this issue slip through the cracks. This is about America’s laws…not about this b.s. hope and change nonsense.

Shame on you DNC!
Shame on you court judges!
Shame on you Obama campaign!
Shame on you, most of all, MSM for going the distance to cover up important information the entire campaign route that would have shed light for so many millions of Americans in making a true, clear choice for president!
Nice job!

With Love,

Leo the Loon

Once again - the left is mudslinging instead of asking their own candidate for valid proof of his natural-born citizenship.

Yes - Mr. Obama is a citizen of the United States as far as we know. Is he a natural-born citizen? That would be highly unlikely because he naturally inherited his British citizenship through his father which is plainly stated on factcheck.org and which he also has admitted in one of his books AND which he let expire in the early 80’s. To be a “natural born” citizen, one must be born to two American citizens on American soil or (as the newest resolution states) a US Military facility (if not in the US).

My question to you is this: Why would you ridicule anybody at all? John McCain was forthcoming with any and ALL information that was requested of him. Mr. Obama, however, was not and to make matters worse, he has had all of his information sealed for privacy and yet he expects transparency from everybody else. Does this not concern you at all?

I would think that if somebody that wanted my vote behaved like that, my vote is NOT what they would get.

More importantly - why aren’t people going after their local representation for allowing this to have happened in the first place? After all, they freely spend our tax dollars and yet the cannot properly vet their candidates for POTUS and then respond to these lawsuits saying “It’s not my job…”. Well - who’s job is it? Some of them are saying it’s the job of the voters and yet the courts are saying that the voters lack standing when asking for information that would allow us to verify their information so as to make an informed decision. It seems like the ultimate catch 22.

Potentially 60+ million people have been fooled and yet will they question Mr. Obama about this or will they turn this into a “race” issue, too?

Regardless of the outcome, the American people are the losers in this situation and our Senate and House need to be held accountable for this and many other issues which they have allowed to take place that have jeopardized the stability of this great country.

The “Dual Citizenship” charge, which has nothing to do with the birth certificate issue, is equally nonsensical. We have a consistent definition of presidential qualification: born on American soil. Nothing, including differing citizenship of one of the parents, invalidates that.

And to those saying “Sigh! if only Obama would have been an obedient, humble public servant and just produced every document requested by far right tax evader steel-can’t-melter sons-of-Birchers…” …there are so many things wrong with that way of thinking that I wouldn’t know where to begin.

Forgive all the ridicule, but you fringe righties ought to go somewhere alone and speculate on whether Obama is circumcized and if so does that make him eligible to be President, or whether this is all part of some Kenyan plot to sap and impurify all our precious bodily fluids.

Bill Frist is the next President

It is against the law to murder; if one person is given a free pass to murder then the laws against murder are useless; if one person is given a free pass to be POTUS, un-constitutionally, then the US Constitution is useless. Is this what the American people really want?

BTW, the only way We The People can know if Obama is qualified under our Constitution to be POTUS is if the Supreme Court puts it to the test. Even Obama supporters should demand nothing less… –jws

It is the obligation and right of *every* american to question the loyalty of the POTUS. It is un-American to question the ‘loons’ who are doing the questioning.

You mean other people write on blogs Obama freely said these things, direct us to a site, transcript or you tube video upload where we can hear the President Elect himself.

Lots of bloggers and conservative Journalists imply Obama has made statements on many topics and subjects but they are never able to provide a direct source

“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States”

Please note that the founders even went out of their way to exclude all current citizens of the US. Why? Why not just define “natural born citizen” as what most people think it means today, that being “a person born on US soil”? Well, the rational explanation as I can see it is that though even the most of the population at the time had been born in and spent their entire lives in the Colonies, the Colonies themselves were British Territory up until the signing of the Treaty of Paris on September 3, 1783. In other words, the native born colonists of the US while being completely indigenous to the Colonies, were not “natural born citizens” because they held prior allegiance to another nation.

Obama freely admits that he held British Citizenship from birth until age 21. He admits to having previously having legally held allegiance to another nation. This is a very serious question that needs to be addressed.

There are other relevant texts and court cases to the question of citizenship that I would love to post, but I am tired now. I highly advise every person, regardless of political persuasion or who you voted for, to read the Federalist Papers. This question was addressed in this HIGHLY relevant historical text.