Posted on 11/07/2008 6:47:37 PM PST by mnehring
This is interesting. Souter tells Obama to produce the vault copy by December 1, 2008. I believe the messiah will defy the Justices.
Who will force the issue? Who wants to open up that pandora's box? Imagine if there is something on that birth certificate that disqualifies Obama from the office of the President. What are you going to do? Start a civil war? There will be blood in the streets you try to enforce the rule of law. This should have happened before the election. Obambi knows it too.
Here is the fraud report first reported at Atlas.
The Supreme Court and Obama's Birth Certificate organicpeas
If The Supreme Court Decides…?
At this point, Supreme Court Justice David Souter's Clerk informed Philip J. Berg, the lawyer who brought the case against Obama, that his petition for an injunction to stay the November 4th election was denied, but the Clerk also required the defendants to respond to the Writ of Certiorari (which requires the concurrence of four Justices) by December 1. At that time, Mr. Obama must present to the Court an authentic birth certificate, after which Mr. Berg will respond.
If Obama fails to do that, it is sure to inspire the skepticism of the Justices, who are unaccustomed to being defied. They will have to decide what to do about a president-elect who refuses to prove his natural-born citizenship.
"I can see a unanimous Court (en banc) decertifying the election if Obama refuses to produce his birth certificate," says Raymond S. Kraft, an attorney and writer. "They cannot do otherwise without abandoning all credibility as guardians of the Constitution. Even the most liberal justices, however loathe they may to do this, still consider themselves guardians of the Constitution. The Court is very jealous of its power - even over presidents, even over presidents-elect."
Also remember that on December 13, the Electoral College meets to casts its votes. If it has been determined that Mr. Obama is an illegal alien and therefore ineligible to become President of the United States, the Electors will be duty-bound to honor the Constitution.
Question.
Please no one make fun of me, I am not a lawyer.
The Supreme Court shows that on Nov. 3 the 08A391 application was denied.
Does this just mean just the application for the injunction?
Or does it mean the application for the injunction.. PLUS negates the Oct. 30 statement of “Response due December 1?
Please someone with knowledge enlighten me?
Yes.
Berg filed the injunction (08A391) was to delay the election until Obama’s legal standing was to be resolved.
And it is separate from docket 08-570. Obama still has to respond by Dec. 1st.
Thank you for your response.
This is good to hear.
Waiting and praying.
What’s duty got to do with it, duty is for boy scouts, not politicians
Thanks Phil! I was wondering why no one picked up on the pretty colors. I’m hoping a purple one comes out. I love purple.
bttt
bookmark
::waves back::
Here you go Jeremiah:
http://comments.obamacrimes.com/blog/_trackback/3962509
Justice Souter denies injunction for stay of predidential election
The writ of certiorari paperwork is downloadable at that post.
Actually Hillary is not sounding too bad right now :)
Who is Prez if he is proved to not be eligible.
bookmark
You can’t run for office under a fraudulent identity. Signing all the forms along is a crime.
There is an announcement. But I found it in the graphics of the FactCheck server and URL searches show they sent it out through one of their virtual servers. THEN, the announcement ended up on TxDarling’s blog and FactCheck posted from her blog as proof.
So, they made the ‘proof’ and 3rd party sourced it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2127901/posts?page=236#236
It’s an unexplored area of Constitutional law. I can imagine several scenarios with conflicting outcomes. The trickiest part will be establishing “standing” - something that many judges are making very very narrow.
Say, FOIA request for BC results in:
- denied; the BC is considered personal info akin to tax records, and only Congress & Supreme Court are Constitutionally in a position to make decisions based on that information
- approved; he is your President, so you have a right to confirm his legitimacy
- denied; in a representative government, only certain representatives have a power to make choices of POTUS
- approved; it is public records, therefor accessible to all who ask
One legally interesting question: on what grounds did the governor of HI seal the records? is he actually granted the power to do so?
Law gets very complicated at this level. There’s a reason why, say, it took ninety-some pages to say the 2nd Amendment applied to individuals and handguns - and said nothing else.
The application was denied. Obama isn’t required to do anything.
I remember that case very well. LVPD still has a problem getting "decent" officers. This should have been a ticket or even just a warning, but OH NO. Gotta arrest mom in front of her kids.
Urgh. Need coffee. Obviously meant 11/4 (not 11/3). Duh.
I shouldn't post while asleep? ;-)
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.