Posted on 11/29/2010 4:02:48 PM PST by STARWISE
For Immediate Release - 29 November 2010 2:30 p.m. EST
U.S. Supreme Court orders were posted at 10:00 a.m. on 29 Nov 2010. See below. Certiorari for our case was denied.
The two justices appointed by Obama who had a direct financial conflict of interest (their very jobs and appointments to the court) in the outcome of this petition and case did not recuse themselves even though they should have!
Their recusal was called for in our petition on page 36.
The two justices and the court ignored that. There were recusals declared by these two Obama appointees in many other petitions including the one immediately before our petition in the orders list and the one immediately after.
IMO, apparently the court needed all nine justices in the room to kill the petition. With the full court of 9 justices it's the rule/vote of 4 to grant certiorari to move the case forward.
With two recusals that would have left only 7 justices and it's then the rule/vote of 3 to grant certiorari to move the case forward.
I suspect the water cooler buzz at SCOTUS were that 3 justices were leaning for granting certiorari. So it looks like Sotomayer and Kagan ignored ethical considerations and stayed in the review of the petition to be sure it got killed, i.e., to be in that room to argue against Certiorari, and to require 4 votes to grant cert instead of 3 ... financial conflict of interest and ethics be damned by those two justices. JMHO.
10-446 KERCHNER, CHARLES, ET AL. V. OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF U.S., ET AL.
The motion of Western Center for Journalism for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/112910zor.pdf
http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt.aspx
A Statement from CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) about the U.S. Supreme Court Decision
The "Roberts Court" of the U.S. Supreme Court in my opinion will be known in history as the Neville Chamberlain supreme court, the great Obama appeaser court.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain
Appeasement due to fear that some immediate small amount of veiled and threatened violence from the far left Saul Alinsky goons and tyrants and bullies, and thus not doing the right thing early only to support the rule of law and the Constitution, ultimately leads to be much bigger problems later.
History has shown us that over and over. This matter should have been addressed by the media and political parties early in the spring of 2008 during the primaries. It wasn't.
Congress should have addressed this when asked and when constitutionally it was required to. It didn't.
The courts should have addressed the merits of the questions when appealed to early on. They didn't.
Everyone in our system of government chose ignoring the problem and appeasement over confrontation and punted the ball to someone else. Now it is far worse.
The Supreme Court has chosen appeasement and inaction over action and dealing with the issue and questions openly in a court of law under the rules of evidence and law. Our constitutional republic and legal system is now compromised and broken.
And it will only get worse as our legal system and constitutional republic further deteriorates and the rule of law gives way more and more to appeasement of bullies such as Obama and his far left cronies and puppet masters.
Appeasement of the constitutional usurpers will not make it go away. It will only delay the inevitable and fester and grow and in the end be a far worse situation to deal with when the real nature of the tyrant reveals himself in a much bolder way and attempts to take away all our protections to our unalienable rights and liberty.
Neville Chamberlain tactics never work with bullies, alinskyites, tyrants, and national socialists.
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner et al v Obama et al
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
This proves what I suspected, one of the so-called conservative Justices has been subverted. Thomas is the obvious choice, what with ‘avoiding the issue’ and protecting his homeboy. Too obvious actually, I don’t think it is him and therefore not Scalia either. Alito is just a follower which leaves... CJ Roberts, the man who is liable and responsible for swearing the usurper in. So how can you use the courts to take down the top Judge in America? You can’t.
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.