Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS Re: Obama....Live Thread

Posted on 12/05/2008 6:33:15 AM PST by maineman

I thought we should have a link to post any and all updates.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: bho; birth; birthcertificate; certifigate; colb; donofrio; obama; obamatransitionfile; obamatruthfile; obamatruthsquad; odinga; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 801-805 next last
To: Centurion2000
I know there would never be a second election, I was just creating a funny, libs with exploding heads scenario, because i felt the need for some humor.

I am very worried that the SCOTUS will ignore the Constitution right now, and i needed some levity...hee hee

301 posted on 12/05/2008 10:21:38 AM PST by Jersey Republican Biker Chick (You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
It may be that none has ever been prosecuted. However, do you believe they will take that chance on not being prosecuted or ruin their political careers?

Also, the SCOTUS upheld the state laws. From the link in post 294.

The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some State laws provide that so-called "faithless electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector.

Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of electors have voted as pledged.

302 posted on 12/05/2008 10:21:59 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

WGN news at noon is running a story coming up toward the end of the hour


303 posted on 12/05/2008 10:22:07 AM PST by WhirlwindAttack (You will find my body surrounded by brass with my slide locked open, I won't go to the camps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000

I really don’t care who is President at this point. I just want the truth and for our Constitution to be upheld so whomever is President they qualify to hold the office!


304 posted on 12/05/2008 10:22:11 AM PST by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm
Now here's the question - he fraudulently ran - he was and is not eligible to run - right? SO, why would the democratic electors get to vote? Wouldn't all 4 get to vote since he is ineligible? Please answer that!

Because according to state laws, the party that wins the popular statewide vote gets to seat their electors in the Electoral college. Now it has happened where both parties attempted to seat their electors in the electoral college and states returned conflicting results. That led to the Compromise of 1877 (google it, interesting story).

305 posted on 12/05/2008 10:22:25 AM PST by Centurion2000 (To protect and defend ... against all enemies, foreign and domestic .... by any means necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000; LucyT; unspun; seekthetruth; Blu By U; All

**PHOTOS AT SCOTUS

###

Obama Birth Certificate Protest at SCOTUS

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2143540/posts


306 posted on 12/05/2008 10:22:28 AM PST by STARWISE ((They (Dims) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war-RichardMiniter, respected OBL author)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: baa39
I believe you might be mistaken. Berg’s case was denied, I’m pretty sure. However, Justice Souter did issue some sort of request for Obama and the DNC to produce the documents named by Monday (birth certificate and several other things). It is not clear whether Obama and the DNC ignored or complied with this request.

To this date Berg's case has not been denied. His stay of the election was denied, but his Writ has not been denied yet, at least it hadn't been denied by my last check of the case last night.
307 posted on 12/05/2008 10:22:34 AM PST by jcsjcm (Upholding the Constitution til my last breath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

Must electors vote for the candidate who won their State’s popular vote?

There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties.

Which States bind electors to popular vote results? Refer to Electors Bound by State Law and Pledges to find out.

The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties’ nominees. Some State laws provide that so-called “faithless electors” may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.

Today, it is rare for electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party’s candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of electors have voted as pledged.


308 posted on 12/05/2008 10:22:44 AM PST by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: Shady Ray; STARWISE; pissant; LucyT; SE Mom; Calpernia; Kevmo; MeekOneGOP; PhilDragoo; ...
Great comment and summary: "Now, the burden of proof as to citizenship has shifted and the claimant of NCB must prove it. Cough up the docs, Barry, or go home to Mombassa."
309 posted on 12/05/2008 10:23:24 AM PST by Grampa Dave (http://freedommarch.org/Home_Page.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Yes. Deport the illegal alien.


310 posted on 12/05/2008 10:23:53 AM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13

Joe Biden was nominated by the Democratic Party to be on the ticket, and this is the direction that the Electors will be certain to take in an event of Obambi’s ineligibility, deferring to the expressed intent of the popular vote.

There is zero chance for McCain to emerge as the President in any scenario here. I know pie-in-the-sky is awful tasty, but please, go on a diet.


311 posted on 12/05/2008 10:24:54 AM PST by mquinn (Obama's supporters: a deliberate drowning of consciousness by means of rhythmic noise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: Blu By U
"This is going to get nasty.."

Just how the MSM likes it. My only question is ...how are they going to pin this on Pubbies when it's their own party doing it?

312 posted on 12/05/2008 10:25:26 AM PST by Earthdweller (Socialism makes you feel better about oppressing people.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: Jersey Republican Biker Chick; trumandogz

If the SCOTUS fails to uphold the Rule of Law and the Constitution, then I guess we are lawlessness and anarchy rules, correct?
***Correct. But Trumandogz the troll doesn’t agree, so let’s find out why.


313 posted on 12/05/2008 10:25:48 AM PST by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
"I have a feeling SCOTUS will simply go back to Article 1, Section 8 authorizing congress to define citizenship standards and dismiss Donofrio’s claim."

Can you explain how that would provide a basis to dismiss? Congress has not legislated anything that would help Obama.

314 posted on 12/05/2008 10:26:10 AM PST by editor-surveyor (Obama - not just an empty suit - - A Suit Bomb invading the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

Bless those Patriots demonstrating at The Supreme Court - they are standing up for ALL of US and The Constitution!


315 posted on 12/05/2008 10:26:51 AM PST by The Sons of Liberty (NO Usurpers in the White House - NObama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: NoObamaFightForConservatives

last nites show is on now. 6-8 cst Pastor Manning will be on, 8-10 Leo Donofrio is on with Ed Hale.


316 posted on 12/05/2008 10:27:08 AM PST by WhirlwindAttack (You will find my body surrounded by brass with my slide locked open, I won't go to the camps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

Well the legalese question is, is illegal to [i]run[/i] or is it illegal to [i]serve[/i]?


317 posted on 12/05/2008 10:27:10 AM PST by mquinn (Obama's supporters: a deliberate drowning of consciousness by means of rhythmic noise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: baa39

The Obama lawyers asked that the request be irrelevant based on the case being dismissed on grounds of standing issues ... as in ‘since Berg has no standing to demand the documents, the affirmative action candidate should not be required to produce the documents.’


318 posted on 12/05/2008 10:27:13 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
If O is deemed ineligible, the President will be Biden, Pelosi, or Hillary. So basically, it’s lose-lose for our party.

Not necessarily. The electors have not yet voted, and they are electors for an ineligible candidate, put forth through a massive fraudulent facade perpetrated by the DNC and the left-wing media.

The Constitution places no favor on political parties, and the SCOTUS is not supposed to either.

The SCOTUS has a variety of options, if they choose to stop this fraud.

319 posted on 12/05/2008 10:27:17 AM PST by meadsjn (Socialists promote neighbors selling out their neighbors; Free Traitors promote just the opposite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13

I do get the idea of the electors voting for who they pledge for, but there are 2 sets of electors in each state. 1 set (same amount of people) for democrat and 1 for republic. Now if the democrat wins the vote by fraudulent means, wouldn’t there have to be an exception to this rule of that ticket voting? I would think so!


320 posted on 12/05/2008 10:28:15 AM PST by jcsjcm (Upholding the Constitution til my last breath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 801-805 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson