It wouild be good not to represent that Ryder says more than it says because the de facto officer doctrine does not apply to decisions as yet unmade which is the point of Ryeder after all where Coastguardsman Ryder brought up the point before the decision was made as does Colonel Hollister in his case.
What is perplexing to me is that Judge Robertson does not feel the federal courts have any role in answering the question, "Were I, as a retired Air Force Colonel [Col. Hollister] and thus subject to perpetual presidential recall to duty, to receive orders from this president so to do, would I have to obey such an order, given the uncertainty surrounding the authority and eligibility of this president to issue such orders to me in the first place? Where so many questions remain on the legitimacy issue, what would be my constitutional duty in this regard, which I swore to in taking my own Constitutional Oath?"
Evidently Judge Robertson found this question "unreasonable," since the "citizenship test" of the president had been amply ventilated on the Internet over the past year or so.
O Goodie. The Internet is now the American standard of law and our court of justice. Okey-dokey. But then, Judge Robertson: Why do we need YOU? Maybe we ought to encourage all federal judges to retire, and leave American constitutional law and justice to determinations on/by the Internet?
Whatta jerk.
I would most desperately like to know what is in the Berg "sealed case"....
Thank you ever so much, AmericanVictory, for your provocative and perceptive insights!