Keeping with his full court press (no pun intended), Berg has filed requesting Summary Judgment on the basis that Team Obama and the DNC did not timely respond to the Requests for Admission, so they are deemed admitted, and also requesting an expedited ruling.
Unfortunately, this is where I become somewhat less than admiring of Mr. Berg;s legal prowess, because, in this attorney's opinion, he "jumped the shark" in counts 20 and 21 of his Motion Requesting An Expedited Ruling On Plaintiff's Motion For Summary Judgment. Specifically:
20. If the Motion is not heard and decided immediately, there will not be any time left in order to replace Obama on the Presidential ballot with an eligible Democratic Presidential Candidate.
Why do I have a problem with this? Because many states have deadlines for placing candidates on ballots, and I'm fairly certain that this has already passed. I'd also wager that most states have already printed the ballots. While he makes a point, that ship has sailed.
21. If Obama is elected as President of the United States and allowed to serve as the United States President, we will have a Constitutional Crisis. If this is allowed, it will change the United States Constitution without proper due process of law. Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States will no longer be afforded the protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
Wow. Take a breath, Phil. This sounds like something St. Andi of the Hand Wringers at the Atlantic Monthly would write if he were not a true believer in the Hopey Changeyness One himself. I usually reserve panic words like "crisis" for scenarios where there is no clear method of dealing with what lies before us. As I discussed a few posts ago, it is largely a matter of timing. If Obama is elected, but not yet sworn in and the judge rules him to be ineligible, then the 20th Amendment comes into play, Biden is a temporary President until an eligible candidate can be elected. The details of the election? We don't have clear guidance, but the Supreme Court can likely establish reasonable guidelines for a new election. If he is found ineligible after being sworn in, then I believe the 25th Amendment outlines the process. I wouldn't call it a "Crisis", but then I'm not a centrist Democrat denied the opportunity to vote for Hillary. I guess context really is everything. Either way, there is no change to the Constitution, and the protections of the Constitution remain unmolested and unrestrained.
Again, I keep wondering why Judge Surrick has not issued a ruling on any of this, but a pleading containing the above-highlighted allegations damage his credibility in my eyes, and since there are some substantive motions before the Court, I do not think I would have taken it that far.