No, it’s not Orly Taitz, who inexplicably remains a licensed attorney despite submitting documents to the courts that should be written in crayon and being sanctioned by multiple judges for malfeasance. Philip Berg, the one who started all this birther nonsense, has been disbarred by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
It may be some time before Pennsylvania lawyer Philip J. Berg files another lawsuit asking the Supreme Court to expel President Barack Obama from office. Earlier this month, Mr. Berg, whose law license was suspended last year for misconduct, lost his right to practice before the Supreme Court.
In 2008, Mr. Berg filed one of the first “birther” lawsuits, asking a federal judge in Philadelphia to bar Mr. Obama from office because of groundless speculation by some on the political fringe that the Democratic nominee had falsified records of his 1961 birth in Honolulu.
The court dismissed the case, finding that Mr. Berg had no standing to bring the claim, and was upheld by the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in Philadelphia. Mr. Berg repeatedly sought Supreme Court intervention on his behalf, petitioning Justices David Souter and Anthony Kennedy, each of whom denied his claim, and then Antonin Scalia, who referred the case to the full court, which rejected the appeal without comment.
But while Mr. Berg doggedly pursued Mr. Obama, he was not so assiduous in caring for his own clients, according to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which in September suspended him from the practice of law for two years.
The U.S. Supreme Court followed by asking Mr. Berg to show cause why it should not disbar him from its practice; he responded by resigning from the Supreme Court bar, which the justices noted in an order earlier this month.
Berg, of course, says this is all retaliation against him and part of Obama’s grand conspiracy to….oh, whatever. Does it really matter?