UPDATE: See the updates below. What appeared to my inexpert eyes to be an order (on account of saying ORDER and having the Judge's name on it) is not, in fact, an order according to Valerie. I've left the original text of the post unaltered, in recognition of my error (which I regret most deeply).
A much remarked, minor story in this election was the question of Senator Obama's birth certificate. We've all ignored it, except to try to shoot it down, because it sounded like a wacko conspiracy theory; and anyway, the campaign produced a birth certificate.
In ignoring this story, we may have made an error. Some of you will recall that the issue arose briefly a little while ago when a Clinton camp supporter filed a suit demanding that Sen. Obama produce various documents to prove that he is able to run for the Presidency.
US Federal District Court Judge R. Barclay Surrick has denied Sen. Obama's motion to dismiss the suit, and has ordered him to produce a certified copy of the original long version of his birth certificate. Presumably, Sen. Obama will comply.
However, the judge's order also states that, according to the law in effect in 1967, Sen. Obama lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia. He has therefore also ordered Sen. Obama to produce a certified copy of his Certification of Citizenship and a certified copy of his Oath of Allegiance.
These must be produced within three days of the order, which was dated 29 September, 2008 -- I think that means, "tomorrow."
UPDATE: As I look at the document more closely, I realize that I may be using the wrong terminology -- I am not a lawyer, so I'm not sure if the whole document is the 'order' or if just the first page is the 'order.' I'll gladly accept corrections for any errors arising from my inexpertise in legal matters.
UPDATE: Valerie, in the comments, says that this is not an order, but a draft of an order showing what the plantiff would like such an order to look like. I'm going to assume she knows better than I do.