Posted on 12/11/2008 8:27:56 AM PST by ckilmer
The U.S. Supreme Court has turned aside a request to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, in a vote scheduled for Monday, until Barack Obama documents his eligibility for the office under the Constitution's requirement that presidents must be "natural born" citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
“Berg had asked the court for an injunction the stay the Electoral College votes and prohibit Vice President Dick Cheney, the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate from counting any votes until that demanded proof arrives.”
“The injunction was sought while Berg awaits the court’s determination on whether it will hear his writ of certiorari requesting review of a dismissal of his case in U.S. District Court in eastern Pennsylvania.”
So VP Dick Cheney can refuse to verify the EC vote.
Interesting.
COLB ping
I never expected this one to go anywhere. I think the best chances for action come after the official election. In any case, this will not stop nor should it.
Well, looks like the SCOTUS will not be proactive on this before the EC meets.
I don't get this. Does WND have this story correct? I thought that Justice Scalia had put it before the whole court for consideration on Friday (tomorrow). So how could Souter intervene now? Has WND confused this entry with an earlier refusal by Souter?
This is Berg’s case and it was expected. Tomorrow is Cort’s case. If SCOTUS turns Cort’s case away then we have no Constitution and the Suaids/China/UAE helped elect an illegal alien involved with a criminal gang aka Chicago political machine.
Thanks again, stockpirate.
Ping.
Right. Thanks. Then I guess Berg can resubmit to another justice. Souter just turns everything down, as one would expect.
Different cases. This does not surprise me.
You see, there is a little known legal statute in a remote nomadic village of mystics and pathalogical swine eaters northeast of Ekibastuz, Kazakhstan, near a small tributary of the Ishum River, on a small ridge facing that big rock jutting up from the ground that my father swears looks like Aunt B’s bunyon that says, “Obama doesn’t have to show any proof of anything whatsoever.”
And that’s how the Supreme Court came up with its decision. I’m afraid international law superceded here.
However, the high court, in a terse website entry, confirmed the application for the injunction was “denied by Justice [David] Souter.”
...............
Souter turned down the Donofrio case for review. It was reinstated by Thomas. Then, this past monday the full court decided they didn’t want to do anything further on the case.
I think the WND article was just badly written on this point.
They do a better job of the narrative below.
The Wrotnowski case had been rejected by Justice Ruth Ginsburg Nov. 26, but then was resubmitted to Justice Antonin Scalia. There was no word of its fate for about 10 days, then the court’s website confirmed it has been distributed for this Friday’s conference, a meeting at which the justices consider whether to take cases.
The good news is that someone has filed in the State of Washington ...they have a law that allows voters to take action...can’t wait to see the way the courts wiggle out of it.
VP is President of the Senate - only role really is to be a tie breaker AND to make the final validation count of votes from the Electoral College.
I had a buddy that said wouldn't it be great if Chaney took the votes, threw them in a bag, tossed them in the trunk of a car a drove west into the sunset???
People are going to have to learn SCOTUS ways in order for suits not to be stuffed
The bama may rule from a jail cell. That’ll be OK with the court. P-ss on the victims.
Well, looks like the SCOTUS will not be proactive on this before the EC meets.
***There could be a reason for that: the 20th amendment. It states explicitly WHEN the events are to take place, and that’s after he’s president elect. So they can hang their hats on this for now, but it means it’ll be an even bigger constitutional crisis if they do intervene (BIG IF).
20th Amendment Sct3: “if the President elect shall have failed to qualify”
Tuesday, December 09, 2008 9:59:02 AM · by Kevmo · 76 replies · 1,363+ views
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2145602/posts
SO, Is Berg resubmitting this to another Justice? WHich one? Thomas again? Scalia? How about Roberts?
my wife is convinced that obama will bury himself with the lies that he spews forth at an amazing rate. She is a firm believer in that karma is a real beyotch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.