Posted on 11/20/2008 8:10:27 PM PST by Frantzie
Posted: Nov.20.2008 @ 9:20 pm | Lasted edited: Nov.20.2008 @ 9:31 pm US SUPREME COURT TAKES EXTRAORDINARY EXPEDITED ACTION IN FAST TRACKING NJ CITIZEN SUIT CHALLENGING '08 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
I am awaiting clarification from the Clerk's office at the United States Supreme Court as to whether my stay application has now been accepted in lieu of a more formal full petition for certiorari (and/or mandamus or prohibition). Such a transformation is a rare and significant emergency procedure. It was used in Bush v. Gore, a case I have relied on in my brief.
We do know the case has certainly been "DISTRIBUTED for Conference", a process usually reserved for full petitions of certiorari. Stays are usually dealt with in a different manner. As to a stay application, a single Justice may; a) deny the stay; b) grant the stay; c) refer the stay to the full Court.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogtext.org ...
Is Intrade still trading Obama options? I am not sure what you are saying.
I am not sure and I do not think Leo is sure. he thinks based on what I read on the site that the case has or may be elevated to emergency status. ???
I seem to remember reading some of that posting, before it got up to about 2500 responses!!
I’ll keep looking for answers, no way I can read all that with 4 month old twins keeping me hopping! :-) Thanks anyway!
*sigh* Go read it again.
Got the Cliff Note version handy? I seem to have misplaced my Robert Byrd Pocket Version. ;-)
Not really, just busy with 4 month old twins—thanks though! :-)
(I’ll try to google info later)
Obama’s current proof of citizenship is ‘trust me’. I don’t believe this will pass muster with SCOTUS. He will have to produce his BC I believe no matter IMO.
Its threads like this that seem to initiate attacks.
Its slow for me right now.
ping to the latest on the Donofrio case
Now I see what your problem is; you don't understand the process.
This is a suit to prevent an unlawful act. They happen every day without any "dangerous precedent."
I would be interested in hearing constitutional scholar and talk show host Mark Levin’s take on this. Has he commented?
Yes, and my computer just crashed and had to recover. It was a very odd thing that has NEVER happened before! FR HAS been slow, true, but this was something new and different.
Sadly no. Our AM conservative talk show “heroes” have been cowards since election day.
I have the upmost respect for Internet talk radio hosst like Ed Hale, Lan Lanphere and the other fellas on Prarie radio who had Leo on for hours this week.
Sadly, I think you are probably correct.
Who would ever have thought that the MSM, who was so hot about the glory of “Investigative Journalism” would suddenly turn into “snuggle puppies”!
Even our conservative TSH media seem to cower, and this is “passing strange”! Actually, if I stop to think about it for very long, it is positively unnerving.
Maybe time to go get more beans and rice for the hard times to come, actually!
Seems like as soon as I put this post up - they started hammering Leo’s site and now FR.
The Obots are trying everything to silence this story.
I saved the cut and paste from Leo’s site at http://www.blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen/, in case Leo’s site goes down:
US Supreme Court case > US SUPREME COURT TAKES EXTRAORDINARY ACTION IN NJ CITIZEN SUIT CHALLENGING ‘08 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Posted: Nov.20.2008 @ 9:20 pm | Lasted edited: Nov.20.2008 @ 9:31 pm
US SUPREME COURT TAKES EXTRAORDINARY EXPEDITED ACTION IN FAST TRACKING NJ CITIZEN SUIT CHALLENGING ‘08 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
I am awaiting clarification from the Clerk’s office at the United States Supreme Court as to whether my stay application has now been accepted in lieu of a more formal full petition for certiorari (and/or mandamus or prohibition). Such a transformation is a rare and significant emergency procedure. It was used in Bush v. Gore, a case I have relied on in my brief.
We do know the case has certainly been “DISTRIBUTED for Conference”, a process usually reserved for full petitions of certiorari. Stays are usually dealt with in a different manner. As to a stay application, a single Justice may; a) deny the stay; b) grant the stay; c) refer the stay to the full Court.
My stay application was originally denied by Justice Souter. So, under Rule 22.4, I renewed it to Justice Thomas who did not deny it. The sparse reporting on this issue I have seen today has failed to stress how unique such a situation is to Supreme Court practice. The vast majority of stay applications are denied. And once denied, a renewed application is truly a desperate measure the success of which heralds one of the rarest birds in Supreme Court history.
The relief I requested, a stay of the national election and a finding that candidates Obama, McCain and Calero be held ineligible to hold the office of President, has also not been granted at this time. So that leaves option “c)”: Justice Thomas has referred the case to the full court. That much is clear from looking at the docket.
What isn’t clear is whether the full court has already examined the referral and taken the extraordinary action of accepting the stay application as if it were a full petition for writ of certiorari which was done in Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 at 98 (2000):
“The court ordered all manual recounts to begin at once. Governor Bush and Richard Cheney, Republican Candidates for the Presidency and Vice Presidency, filed an emergency application for a stay of this mandate. On December 9, we granted the application, treated the application as a petition for a writ of certiorari, and granted certiorari.” (Emphasis added.)
It’s not clear that SCOTUS precedent would allow a stay application to be “DISTRIBUTED for Conference” without it first having been transformed by the court into a full petition. I don’t know if such a transformation could be sanctioned by Justice Thomas by himself. Again, I’m waiting for an official disposition notice from the Clerk’s office. Regardless, either the full court has set this for Conference, or Justice Thomas has done it on his own. Either way, it signifies an affirmative action inside the US Supreme Court testifying to the serious issues raised by this law suit.
Rather than explain the intense pre-requisites pertaining to a stay surviving denial, I’ve uploaded the following page from SUPREME COURT PRACTICE, 8th Edition, the ultimate SCOTUS resource:
Hey there! My hubby won’t let me buy any weapons (3 young sons—it makes him nervous), so if those riots break out, I might bring my traveling circus to your place. lol
Seriously though, my dad is stocking up. He’d be over here from Greenville in a heartbeat. Hope the house alarm is good enough until then...*sigh*
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.