Replies

And, I might add, Lamberth totally blew off Judge Carter’s statements that Taitz’ case would properly be heard as a Quo Warranto in the DC Circuit. Sounds like he gave no legal justification for contradicting Carter. Sounds like he just blew a great big raspberry in all our faces and expects us to treat it as if it’s settled law then.

The arrogance of these SOB’s is incredible. Either that, or Royce C Lamberth was told what the end result had to be and he didn’t want to even bother trying to come up with some mindless blather to cover up that he was just farting in the general direction of the Constitution, as ordered to do.

Take your pick.

And, I might add, Lamberth totally blew off Judge Carter’s statements that Taitz’ case would properly be heard as a Quo Warranto in the DC Circuit.

Carter never said that. He said that he had no jurisdiction to hear a quo warranto claim, because quo warranto claims can only be heard in D.C. He never said that Taitz's quo warranto claim was a proper one or that it would survive a motion to dismiss in D.C.

And, I might add, Lamberth totally blew off Judge Carter’s statements that Taitz’ case would properly be heard as a Quo Warranto in the DC Circuit. Sounds like he gave no legal justification for contradicting Carter. Sounds like he just blew a great big raspberry in all our faces and expects us to treat it as if it’s settled law then.

The arrogance of these SOB’s is incredible. Either that, or Royce C Lamberth was told what the end result had to be and he didn’t want to even bother trying to come up with some mindless blather to cover up that he was just farting in the general direction of the Constitution, as ordered to do.

Take your pick.

I pick neither. I have read Judge Lamberth’s Memorandum Opinion in Taitz v Obama and he lays out quite precisely why he dismissed Ms. Taitz claim. Because Judge Lamberth is a conservative, I see him giving Ms. Taitz not so subtle pointers on who would be granted standing to bring a quo warranto claim in his Court and under what circumstances.
Judge Lamberth’s opinion is written the way lawyers who are judges talk to their fellow lawyers.