[David]

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.

I just flat out don't believe that. I see the most likely result of the Petition for Cert as being outright failure to get votes to hear the case period. No further remedy. Certainly not from David Souter.

There is just nothing in the procedure for any remedy remotely like this.

Further this is a highly charged political issue which is the kind of question the Court has historically ducked. It is not the kind of case the Court wants to hear or consider.

It would be nice to be wrong.

[shield]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2128383/posts?page=420#420

[LucyT]

Thanks, David. Everyone will want to read your comment. A couple of days ago, someone on another website wrote a similar statement about Supreme Court Justice David Souter.

Ping to #471

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2128383/posts?page=471#471

[Calpernia]

>>>>I just flat out don’t believe that. I see the most likely result of the Petition for Cert as being outright failure to get votes to hear the case period. No further remedy. Certainly not from David Souter.

I’m sorry. Can you reword that as if you are speaking to a 3 year old? I didn’t understand it.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks David for this comment (msg 471), thanks LucyT for the link.

I just flat out don't believe that. I see the most likely result of the Petition for Cert as being outright failure to get votes to hear the case period. No further remedy. Certainly not from David Souter. There is just nothing in the procedure for any remedy remotely like this.