Posted on 11/19/2008 11:37:06 AM PST by LongIslandConservative
Just updated today
No. 08A407 Title: Leo C. Donofrio, Applicant v. Nina Mitchell Wells, New Jersey Secretary of State
Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of New Jersey Case Nos.: (AM-0153-08T2 at the New Jersey Appellate Division without a docket number)
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nov 3 2008 Application (08A407) for stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter. Nov 6 2008 Application (08A407) denied by Justice Souter. Nov 14 2008 Application (08A407) refiled and submitted to Justice Thomas. Nov 19 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 5, 2008.
Call or email your SOS they should be able to provide you a list.....(You might even try their web page.)
Joy make sure you include the time spent in jail if they conspire to promote fraud on the people. Your SOS should have that information also.
Well said, Frantzie. I get frustrated by the lack of coverage in the MSM, but even more so by the bs promulgated on this formerly constitutionalist website.
Agreed the first hurdle was the lowest.
Ch. Justice Roberts should recognize the significance of the case.
If not him then Justice Kennedy.
Someone tell me what’s the source confirming that the Messiah has spent $800,000 defending the birth certificate lawsuits? How would anyone know this publicly?
Thanks. It is sad because our freedom is about to be taken away from us. Leo’s story is incredible. Retired lawyer who comes back on his own dime to try to protect the Constitution from essentially a coup. He is very reluctant for the limelight but he did it to protect the Constitution and our freedom.
Leo may be the one person standing between whomever is behind this foreign islamic “agent.” Free republic is great but now is the time people need to wake up and get serious.
Leo is on at 9 pm est and 10 pm on two different internet radio shows. This his last radio appearences before the Dec 5th date at SCOTUS.
http://www.blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen/
Click on the links on the web site for the shows.
A reminder again to write a letter to each of the Justices expressing your concern that they defend the constitution.
It looks like some progress on other a new case.
In Texas the Jody Brockhausen vs Esperanze Andrade, SOS, case is currently pending. Was filed on Nov. 14, case # 081001C3368 in 368th Judicial District, Williamson County
Does anyone know the status of the 2nd Cali case, Corbett vs. Bowen in Orance County
I haven’t had time to go and dig out the laws that are applicable for you this evening, but I do know this: The year after McCain was born, the Congress passed a law naturalizing folks who had been born in the Canal Zone since 1904. I’ll try and address this more later, as time permits.
What cases are these? Leo gave people a template on the radio last night but they need to rush them to the Supreme Court in their states.
There is a whole group on Peoplespassions.org that has filed suits from CT, WA, GA, NY. I have been in email contact with some of them and they are considering reorganizing and refiling their cases.
Originally they filed them without any assistance from counsel.
I don’t know if Corbett and Brockhausen are independent or connected with Peoplespassions.
Leo last night gave a pretty good road map or template on Lan Lamphere’s show on how to structure the cases. The show is archived.
I wish there was a cookie cutter tyemplate.
It is nice to see people trying to protect the Constitution.
Leo will be on soon.
no worries. its a side issue we can talk about after we block the marxist from the office
“So no one has standing to demand proof of citizenship in your little world?”
Jim Noble -
Without posting the text of the litany of citations I normally provide:
Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 18
Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5
1st Amendment
9th Amendment
10th Amendment
Standing, in THIS case is NOT necessarily expressed in law.
Almost certainly Keyes would have standing by virtue that he was a candidate in an election which MAY be based upon the perpetration of a fraud. Donofrio, as well, since thats what NJ law seems to state - although he was denied by the NJ Supreme Court.
HOWEVER:
The 1st Amendment provides for the right of the People to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. This is rooted in English Common Law as the “Right of Petition”.
Additionally, the 9th Amendment states that there are other rights of citizens that are not expressly stated in the Constitution. Possibly, the right to ensure the eligibility of POTUS candidates?
Continuing, the 10th Amendment states that the powers not vested in the Constitution, but not prohibited by it, are reserved to the States or the People.
Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 mandates that no person except a natural born Citizen, be POTUS.
Furthermore, Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 18 states that Congress shall make all laws as be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the Powers vested by the Constitution. They DID NOT do that (mandate eligibility verification) in this case.
So, in absence of written law, this case devolves to the Founding Fathers’ concept of “original intent” and that is something for SCOTUS to decide.
Therefore, for ALL of the above reasons, the People are ENTITLED to demand verification of eligibility ... IMO.
“Bottom line is whatever information does come out, the Court is loath to jump into a political question, especially one that pits the power of the judicial branch against the executive branch”.
Then I guess that Bush v. Gore was just something we ALL collectively dreamed up in a pot smoke haze ...
Go back to the couch .. we’ll keep track of things
“Which he promptly produced. A vault copy.
Which shows him being born in Colon, in the Republic of Panama; not in the Canal Zone, or on a US military base.”
Awww Geez ... not THIS sh*t again ...
Our system of laws is rooted in English Common Law. And the Founding Fathers followed it, unless there was an explicit deviation. Their concept of “original intent” devolved from it. They took the BEST of English Common Law and threw out the crap.
The definition of “natural born citizen” was NOT thrown out.
Per Blackstone in his Commentaries On English Common Law, a person born overseas to 2 natural born citizens who were in service to the Crown was a natural born citizen (Blackstone, Book 1. Chapter 10). You can look it up ...
BTW: SCOTUS commonly refers to Blackstone when deciding cases with historical roots.
“...and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.”
That is chilling and should bring an cause every justice to be concerned.
Good question. Does anyone have a link?
Can this be moved to breaking please ? !
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.