THE IO—Obama has resisted providing proof of citizenship or other traditionally-public documents since concerns about his citizenship arose last June. Every attempt to compel Obama to provide proof of his true identity has been blocked with a zeal that must be causing some of his most ardent supporters to ask themselves, "What are you hiding from me?"

As of Inauguration Day, Obama and his administration have aggressively pursued numerous agendas that promise to cause a chain reaction of domestic social, political and economic problems. Many of the policies being implemented by Obama, et al are blatantly unconstitutional. If it turns out that this man of highly suspect nationality is not qualified to be president, it will be increasingly difficult to unravel the mess his administration is creating the longer he is allowed to remain in office.

On March 3, 2009, Leo Donofrio petitioned U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to pursue a writ of quo warranto which, literally translated, means "by what warrant?"

Since each civil action brought forward to challenge Obama’s citizenship in state, federal and supreme courts have been dismissed, it has become obvious that the nation’s judges are not willing to rule on the matter. So, absent a sea change in protection for a man whose public record has been cleaned up behind him since before he was born, quo warranto may be the only way to determine Obama’s citizenship.

Holder, an Obama appointee, may cite a conflict of interest at which time he may be recused and replaced by Bush appointee U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor. If Taylor refuses to pursue the writ, Donofrio, in theory, could, himself, place the question before Obama: "By what warrant...are you qualified to be president of the United States?"

Quo warranto is a powerful writ. The Declaration of Independence was a writ of quo warranto addressed to the king of England; his less than satisfactory answer sparked a revolution.