It looks like the court had better things to do:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was a British subject at birth.
The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election. Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth _ his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject _ he cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen," one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president.
There was at least one other appeal on a similar suit, but while the AP says a decision is pending on that case SCOTUSblog says it was dismissed on Nov. 3. That case was originally filed by 9/11 truther Philip J. Berg who insists that Obama was born in Kenya. I won't dignify that with a counter-argument, especially since Berg himself doesn't have any evidence for his claim, but if you're interested in the evolution of the Obama conspiracy theories surrounding his birth Dave Weigel has a good piece at Slate explaining how they came about. In the meantime, lest the birthers get any ideas about the high court not commenting on the charges, Lyle Denniston explains what this means:
The Court, in neither instance, gave reasons for turning down the applications. In neither case did the Court seek a reponse, thus indicating it had little interest in either or had found them to be completely without merit.
It's OK guys. I'm sure there are some lonely aliens in New Mexico who are just waiting for someone to accuse them of abducting people.
--A. Serwer
