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.
Is picture of denouncement.
From what I’ve read, such birth announcements can be sent to the newspaper any time after the fact of the birth, no matter whether it occurred locally or not. Plus, the address given did not match any address known to be connected with Obama’s mother, father or grandparents. In a section of town with large expensive houses, too.
Of course, they are state electors. But they fill a federal purpose. There is an open question that states have any power over them except to choose them.
I have been arguing that your #1 scenario applies but don’t see how you get the 538-0 vote. Why would Obama votes go to McCain? Why would they not just be disqualified?
It isn't an open question. The laws have been upheld as they are state electors.
There is no federal law that requires electors to vote as they have pledged, but 29 states and the District of Columbia have legal control over how their electors vote in the Electoral College. This means their electors are bound by state law and/or by state or party pledge to cast their vote for the candidate that wins the statewide popular vote.
Polarik, that announcement was in the graphic files in FactCheck with those COLBs of many colors.
A new election? Sure, we do this all the time.
FactCHeck we all doubt. Do we have any HI freepers that could check the archive there? Our are all on microfilm and certainly wouldn't appear as the one FC posted.
Ping
“and the fact that he’s stonewalling certainly should raise a red flag for any fair-minded citizen.......”
The problem is that there arent enough fair-minded citizens. If there were we wouldnt be dealing with this at all. McCain and Palin would be preparing to take the reins.
Thanks Cal!
Your link illustrates the correctness of my claim. Read it again.
Sorry I’m so late getting back to you. You are right too!
So many Americans don’t even KNOW about this issue, thanks to the cloak Obama wears, bought and paid for by the MSM.
In 29 states, the electors are legally bound to vote for the states choice.
Why do you keep repeating this? Read the link you posted which tells you “Many constitutional scholars agree that Electors remain FREE AGENTS despite state laws and that, if challenged, such laws would be ruled unconstitutional.” and “Indeed, when it comes down to it, electors are free to vote for whom they personally prefer, despite the general public’s desire.”
These statements should be sufficient proof that your argument rests on nothing consitutional.
Must electors vote for the candidate who won their State's popular vote?
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties.
Which States bind electors to popular vote results? Refer to Electors Bound by State Law and Pledges to find out.
The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some State laws provide that so-called "faithless electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.
Do you honestly believe that a Dem operative will vote against their party and Obama? At the least, they are bound by pledges and would be drummed out of the party.
I’ve enlightened 5 people today. They can’t believe it’s already gotten to the SCOTUS and the MSM hasn’t said a word.
Led efforts to achieve the first state win for the National Popular Vote plan in our home state of Maryland
That there causes heartburn!
Did you see where Dean is stepping down from his position as head of the DNC? Wonder if it has any thing to do with being named in Berg’s law suit.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2129476/posts
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.