3rd Circuit Affirms Kerchner Dismissal & Orders Appellants to Show Cause (Possible Sanctions)

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals ^ | 07/02/2010 | Judges: Sloviter, Barry and Hardiman

[butterdezillion]

Because of all the law enforcement I have contacted none will even touch this. And I’ve contacted everybody you can imagine, at every level.

That’s why this is not just a political issue and why it cannot rightly be resolved by Congress or the courts alone. Our entire law enforcement system is politicized beyond any resemblance to the Constitution. We are Mexico, Iran, Venezuela.

And THAT makes it unconscionable for anybody calling himself a “conservative” to poo-pooh this issue. This is war against the very rule of law.

[MamaTexan]

Maybe it is just the Constitution in which no one can have standing!

Or maybe because:

Article 3, Section 2, Clause 1
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

[Please note where a citizen is concerned, it says citizens of STATES]

§ 1218. The inhabitants enjoy all their civil, religious, and political rights. They live substantially under the same laws, as at the time of the cession, such changes only having been made, as have been devised, and sought by themselves. They are not indeed citizens of any state, entitled to the privileges of such; but they are citizens of the United States. They have no immediate representatives in congress.
Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution

-----

Claiming to be a citizen of the United States today means your claiming to be a creation of government. This means you legally and voluntarily make yourself 'subject to' it's jurisdiction.

The Constitution acknowledges Citizens of States, and nowhere in the entire Judiciary Act of 1789 do the words 'citizen of the United States' appear.

If you aren't the right kind of citizen, administrative law courts can treat you however they like.

[MamaTexan]

Now that he is POTUS, "upholding the Constitution" means impeachment.

That's just it...

Impeachment is for sitting presidents, and if one is not legitimately a president, there can be no impeachment.

[CDR Kerchner]

Update: U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals panel reviews Apuzzo’s response explaining why he appealed the district judge’s decision. Apuzzo not sanctioned. Order to show cause discharged.

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Attorney Apuzzo Not Liable for Obama’s/Congress’ Damages and Costs Incurred by Them in Defending the Kerchner Appeal

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/07/third-circuit-court-of-appeals-finds.html

[Jim Noble]

But when elected officials refuse to act

There are three tiers of elected officials with jurisdiction:

First, the 538 Electors for President of the United States. 364 of them took a favorable view of Obama's eligibility.

Next, the 535 voting Members of Congress and Senators who met on January 6, 2009 to count the electoral votes and to raise and rule on objections. All 535 had the opportunity to offer objections, all acted by accepting the votes.

Third, the President of the Senate. Obama's certificate of election was signed by Richard Cheney of Wyoming, so he also acted.

All the elected officials with jurisdiction acted in a timely fashion. None refused to act.

They just didn't do what you wanted them to do.