MOTION for Preliminary Injunction - Taitz v Obama (QW - DC district court)

Scribd ^ | 2/16/2010 | Taitz

[rxsid]

"Plaintiff is seeking a Preliminary Injunction to recuse the US attorney's office from representing the defendant.
Plaintiff is seeking the Preliminary injunction-Injunctive relief to obtain the vital records of the defendant prior to the February 26 deadline for document and response submission of the response by the Plaintiff to the CA Bar.
...
Memorandum of point and authorities

The only relevant authority in this case, is the unanimous decision rendered by the Supreme Court of the United States and provided by the opinion written by two justices: John Paul Stevens and opinion by Steven Breyer. "Sitting president of the United States has no immunity from civil law litigation against him from acts done before office and not related to the office."
...

Preliminary injunctive relief sought
...
Plantiff is seeking an order by this honorable court directing the defendant to release by February 26,2010 his original birth certificate, which was allegedy obtained based on the defendant's birth in Kapiolani hospital in Hawaii on 08.04.61.

"..." directing the defendant to release by February 26 his school enrolment records and financial aid application records from Occidental college, Columbia University, Harvard university and Punahoa high school

"..."directing the defendant to release by February 26 any and all passpor applications"

...

Complete MOTION, here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/27132803/MOTION-for-Preliminary-Injunction

[Las Vegas Ron]

For separation of powers reasons, courts are not going to get involved in a challenge to the qualifications of a sitting President.

I can see where that could cause huge problems, is this why courts have been refusing to here cases based on standing, is that their way to wiggle out of it?

Every state has procedures on the books for challenging a candidate's right to be on the ballot. Those challenges have to be brought before the election and, in most states, can only be brought by an opposing candidate

I can definitely see that becoming an issue if nobamma decides to seek re election, I'm surely losing hope that this will be resolved in the courts.

But if it turns out that Obama was indeed a fraudulent POTUS, wouldn't that nullify every law he signed while in office?

Seems to me that would cause more of a crisis then just booting his butt out now.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Then why is there a provision for Quo Warranto?

The quo warranto statute has never been used against a President. The only times it has been used, as far as I know, is against minor officials.

[Las Vegas Ron]

The Holder/Emanual pass key pay check.

LOL....troll and go.

[Lurking Libertarian]

But if it turns out that Obama was indeed a fraudulent POTUS, wouldn't that nullify every law he signed while in office?

Probably not, under something called the "de facto officer doctrine."

[Cicero]

Too late!

[rxsid]

Let's not forget that (at least) 1 lawsuit was filed prior to the DNC convention (let alone the election). Then, after he was only President-elect and prior to the E.C. votes were cast or counted in Congress...multiple lawsuits were filed againts him.

IMO, the reason this wasn't touched in 2008 or 2009 comes down to the touchy subject of race. It's not about the subject matter at hand. It's about the color of his skin and this country's history re: that.

NOBODY was going to "deny" the first "black" president (even though he's more white and arabic than black). Especially when he enjoyed high "approval" ratings. No way, no how.

Remember though, it took over 2 years for Nixon to be brought down by the cover-up.

So, who knows now that his poll numbers are in the toilet and the Tea Partier's are starting to affect Congressional races.

[Lurking Libertarian]

I would be interesting though to see him release the original and find that it is different from the one that they admitted to posting on the Internet, FRAUD.

I don't believe any court will hear any eleigibility case on the merits until and unless Obama runs for re-election. At that time, I'm sure some candidate on the ballot (probably not the Republican) will bring a proper election-law challenge to Obama's eligibility.

When that happens, my prediction is that Obama will present an official Hawaiian short-form COLB-- like the one he posted on the internet, but with an official raised seal from Hawaii. At that point, he will claim that he has no obligation to produce a long form, because the short form is valid under Hawaiian law and the Constitution therefore requires every other state to give it "Full Faith and Credit." That will be an interesting court fight.

[Las Vegas Ron]

I am speaking as a lawyer here, so don't start calling me an Obot.

I wouldn't do that, I know who the obots are on these threads. We ran into each other on the NBC thread the other day: Here if any one missed it, great thread

Even if it turns out that he wasn't born in the States, wouldn't it still come down to the NBC issue.

I just know they would argue it doesn't matter because his mom was a citizen, therefore he meets the requirements.

There is a lot of rulings and historical evidence to back up the definition of NBC, being born of two citizen parents.

I really hate to see our Country and Constitution being torn to shreds like this by this commie.

Even SR 511 defined McCain as being eligible because of two citizen parents, this whole thing really frustrates me.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Let's not forget that (at least) 1 lawsuit was filed prior to the DNC convention (let alone the election). Then, after he was only President-elect and prior to the E.C. votes were cast or counted in Congress...multiple lawsuits were filed againts him.

But not by anyone entitled to bring a challenge under state election laws.

[Candor7]

Its amazing, one of these Taitz articles gets posted and you have a group pof 3 to 7 lawyers ready to crucify anyone who supports Taitz's spunk to stay with it. I mean you couldn't see a lawyer faster if you rode on an ambulance bumper.

They will have to absolutely destroy Taitz to shut her up, so its important that she be decried and dehumanized for when that later happens.

You want to see a lawyer? No need to make an appointment. Just post a Taitz article and you will have a few lawyers you can ask for advice and referral. Free of Charge !They are already getting paid by somebody.So they can't charge you for any advice they give.

Its the Taitz thread Legal Referral Service, brought to you by the Mods of FR? Thanks guys!

[Las Vegas Ron]

That assumes a crime of criminal fraud has not been committed.Interesting assumption.

Hmmm, interesting, thanks.

[MissDairyGoodnessVT]

this was my reasoning also from the very beginning of this mess

[Lurking Libertarian]

There is a lot of rulings and historical evidence to back up the definition of NBC, being born of two citizen parents.

There are also a lot of rulings saying that anyone born on U.S. soil, even to two alien parents, is an NBC. There is no absolutely definitive SCOTUS ruling, but the courts are not going to use a doubtful precedent to overturn the will of the voters.

Even SR 511 defined McCain as being eligible because of two citizen parents, this whole thing really frustrates me.

Because he wasn't born on U.S. soil. There is a lot of case law that birth on U.S. soil is enough. (I will concede that there are arguments both ways, but that is not going to be enough to get SCOTUS to overturn an election, IMO.)

[Las Vegas Ron]

NOBODY was going to "deny" the first "black" president

Yep, reparations via electing a half black POTUS (not to mention a lot of white guilt)

[rxsid]

"Let's not forget that (at least) 1 lawsuit was filed prior to the DNC convention (let alone the election). Then, after he was only President-elect and prior to the E.C. votes were cast or counted in Congress...multiple lawsuits were filed againts him.

But not by anyone entitled to bring a challenge under state election laws.

---------------------------------------------------------

That's what the judge(s) said anyway. Of course, we know judges are 100% correct 100% of the time.

[SvenMagnussen]

Taitz is petitioning the Court as a pro se party to prosecute the Presentment accusing Obama, et. al. of election fraud and other acts.

The case number is the reflection of the DC Court accepting the Presentment from the American Grand Jury of Georgia.

Christopher-Earl Strunk has moved the Court to allow him to prosecute the case.

If not Taitz or Strunk, I’m sure another attorney will step forward to prosecute.

If the Presentment is dismissed without prosecution, then there are other presentments from other citizen grand juries available to be filed.

Res Ipso Loquiter.

[peeps36]

Has anybody been able to ask Obummer why he refuses to release these basic documents? You would figure the media would be just a little bit curious about his reasons for doing this. I don't think they would give Sarah Palin the same courtesy.

[Las Vegas Ron]

There are also a lot of rulings saying that anyone born on U.S. soil, even to two alien parents, is an NBC.

Oy, I spent 4 days on that last thread regarding that issue, don't want to start another one.

I agree though that this probably won't see any resolution until 2011 (barring any new revelations or catastrophic drop in poll numbers) if he decides to run again, damn I hate to say that.

Thank you for sharing your insights, it's appreciated very much.

[mommyq]

I disagree. Philip Berg, former AG in PA, tried to have the DNC vet Obama prior to the convention, and they turned a deaf ear to him. He also tried up to the Inauguration, and no one would listen to him, Orly or Keyes. They would insist it was too late, or too early, or any other type of obfuscation.

[wintertime]

Ping