Posted on 12/22/2008 10:05:22 AM PST by Kevmo
Will the 3rd time be the Charm in Challenging Obama's Eligibility?
Like the Energizer Bunny, the cases challenging Obama's eligibility are still going strong. There have been a ton of lawsuits challenging Obama's right to take office with fellow Democrat Philip Berg taking the lead.
To date Berg has filed several injuctions, all of which have been denied except his original compliant that is scheduled to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on January 9th, 2009.
From WND --
"I know that Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally qualified natural born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of president of the United States," Berg said in a statement on his ObamaCrimes.com website.
"Obama knows he is not 'natural born' as he knows where he was born and he knows he was adopted in Indonesia; Obama is an attorney, Harvard Law grad who taught Constitutional law; Obama knows his candidacy is the largest 'hoax' attempted on the citizens of the United States in over 200 years; Obama places our Constitution in a 'crisis' situation; and Obama is in a situation where he can be blackmailed by leaders around the world who know Obama is not qualified," Berg's statement continued.
On one hand, it is almost hard to believe Obama's origin of birth could still be an issue at this point his political career. On the other hand, with cult-like support rivaling David Koresh & Charlie Manson that the "Anointed One" has generated, I do not put anything past them in advancing their socialist agenda.
If the birth certificate is legal and can be verified - he should produce it and put an end to this circus-like spectacle of challenges...
A partial listing and status update for several of the cases surrounding Obama's eligibility to serve as president is below:
Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg's latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was denied. But the conference on the case is set Jan. 9.
Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.
Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.
Private investigator Douglas Hagmann of Homeland Security US reported earlier he found 13 cases challenging Obama's eligibility still active or semi-active.
One last tidbit for you to chew on.... what if the birth certificate in question is a fraud?
What if, through these filings, the Supreme Court KNOWS Obama is not eligible to be POTUS but is thinking of the socialist $#!+-storm they will cause should they rule his election null and void?
But what about the petitioners? All these suits brought before the court?
Unless 0 produces a real copy of his BC, there will be doubt in millions of peoples' minds from now on. And no legal recourse?
If it's Congress that makes the decision--after 1 senator & 1 C'man challenge eligibility, --then there would be nothing for the SC to decide. That would be it.That's the way I read it.
Unless 0 produces a real copy of his BC, there will be doubt in millions of peoples' minds from now on.Yes, but that's a political problem, not a legal one.
It does not say who resolves the matter in the first case of the PE being the only one failing to qualify. But that is a different issue than the one we were originally discussing. As you say, “it is important... also”.
It does not say who resolves the matter in the first case of the PE being the only one failing to qualify. But that is a different issue than the one we were originally discussing. As you say, “it is important... also”.It does say that the VP elect will act as president. It doesn't appear to allow for anyone else to qualify at that point though. In the case of an under aged president-elect at least he might eventually qualify. In the case of non-natural born it sounds like we would have four years of an acting president. I don't see a place for the Supreme Court to get involved.
It would be a hard case to make that the authors of the 20th meant to have the courts resolve the case of only the president-elect not qualifying but for Congress to resolve the case of neither the president-elect or the vp-elect qualifying.
I just don't see how the courts could get involved at this point.
History shows that in order to have total obedience of the enslaved, the dictator must be ruthless enough to off a few of his own faithful, if merely to show the rest he means business. Hitler had his blackshirts & brownshirts--had the 1st bunch slaughtered to make sure the SS he was developing would not hesitate to follow orders exactly, without question.
It would be a hard case to make that the authors of the 20th meant to have the courts resolve the case of only the president-elect not qualifying but for Congress to resolve the case of neither the president-elect or the vp-elect qualifying.
***That’s true enough. There are a dozen places where the SCOTUS can hang their hats if they want to punt on this issue, and this is one of them. I’ve been saying all along that the most likely outcome is a split-the-baby decision. But that doesn’t make it right. Nor constitutional. If there’s a constitutional requirement that the president be qualified but no constitutional provision for establishing it, that’s exactly the kind of thing the SCOTUS was set up for. The language is relatively plain when it comes to natural born, age, and other requirements for the pres.
Thanks for the clarification, Billybob.
I have a question to ask you, it came from an exchange on Intrade’s forum.
http://bb.intrade.com/intradeForum/posts/list/420/2279.page
The contention is that for the Supreme Court, “all cases that the justice considers properly filed are sent to conference.” Is that true? Wasn’t there at least one other case that was denied in SCOTUS and re-submitted?
Has there ever been an issue where there were 5 cases concurrently before the SCOTUS and 3 of them were forwarded for conference? Would forwarding the issue rather than just denying without comment be an indicator of legitimacy once it’s happened 3 times?
Requests for Emergency Relief are "referred" to the other Justices when the ONE Justice who has the case things that relief MIGHT be appropriate. I've talked about this process for about four months, now.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article, "Come Back to 1600, Johnny Dean, Johnny Dean"
The Declaration, the Constitution, parts of the Federalist, and America's Owner's Manual, here.
Thanks for the clarification, John. Your years of dealing with the SCOTUS sure helps keep things in perspective for us.
Thanks, John.
Bookmark.
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.