Replies

The plaintiff requests the conference of the Supreme Court Justice of his choice - in this case, Justice Kennedy first, and then Chief Justice Roberts.

Why C.J. John Roberts? And why Justice Anthony Kennedy before him? It was Atty. Orly Taitz who directed the plaint to these two Supreme Court Justices. One or the other will have to be on board, along with Associate Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, for the case to proceed to oral arguments. If both had refused, it would have been pointless to petition Justice Scalia, Thomas, or Alito to bring up Noonan et al v. Bowen, only for it to be denied in conference. Better that the case be quietly ignored by two than publicly denied by six.

But for Noonan et al to win, both C.J. Roberts and Justice Kennedy must rule for the plaintiffs. So it makes sense to address the plaint to the two Justices in the balance, eliciting their support in order to win them over.

@Venturer wrote, "Obama owns 5 votes on the court. We all know that." No, not all of us "know" that, as is evidenced by the old saw, "The Constitution means whatever Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy says it means on any given day." Justice Kennedy is not a conservative like Justice Scalia, but he is no Justice Ginsburg either. He is the swing vote on the Court. Remember, it was Justice Kennedy who voted against the Unaffordable Obamacare Act, and it was C.J. Roberts who caved.

Keep praying and faint not - keep fasting and give up not! Remember... even the American Revolution was only won at the last hour, and that only because bad weather prevented Gen. Cornwallis' escape by sea. Even the salvation of the world, dead in trespasses and sin, seemed to be a lost cause, with the Savior crucified, dead, and buried, and His disciples scattering - until God, the Father and the Holy Spirit, returned life to its Author, Life Himself. God specializes in raising the dead, even the dead country, when it is most obviously beyond the power of man to do so.