Posted on 12/08/2008 7:44:10 AM PST by Froggie
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was a British subject at birth.
The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, New Jersey, to intervene in the presidential election. Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth -- his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject -- he cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen," one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president.
Donofrio also contends that two other candidates, Republican John McCain and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero, also are not natural-born citizens and thus ineligible to be president.
At least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court. Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, argues that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama says and the Hawaii secretary of state has confirmed.
Berg says Obama also may be a citizen of Indonesia, where he lived as a boy. Federal courts in Pennsylvania have dismissed Berg's lawsuit.
By now it should be apparent to all that the question of Obama’s qualifications for POTUS merits an official investigation by Congress and that, so far, the SCOTUS has denied justice in this case. Is this perhaps the beginning of the intentional destruction of the US Constitution?
In modern usage the term has come to be used to describe a generally unstable or "backward" dictatorial regime, especially one where elections are often fraudulent and corruption is rife. By extension, the word is occasionally applied to governments where a strong leader hands out appointments and advantages to friends and supporters, without much consideration for the law.
“It is time for the nations of the world to come forth and take the leadership because of the failure of the United States Government and the States where crimes were committed on 09/11/01, where no thorough investigation and indictments occurred, to investigate, arrest and prosecute the people responsible for the murders on 9/11/01, specifically including George W. Bush and Richard Cheney.
” “Bush and his cronies made 9/11 happen or let it happen. And, if they let it happen, then they made it happen. Either way, they are responsible; and more important, they have completely and unequivocally covered-it-up!”
Yes, this is from the guy FReepers are putting their faith in. Unbelievable.
I would be happy to be proven wrong.
Except for the “confirmed” part.
What they’re saying is, it’s congress’ problem.
I guess to defeat evil, you have to think like evil people and there is no doubt in my mind that the 1 is evil, along with his comrades.
Nothing would really surprise me anymore, to be honest.
I sure wish they would have said so - would have been a brilliant move on their part.
“Why would any of us think the Supreme Court would follow the Constitution?”
Seriously, there are 4 strong conservative justices at the Supreme Court. The case was presented and Justice Thomas allowed it to be brought to conference. If Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito did not feel this case had merit, then it didn’t have merit.
This case was attempting to create a definition of natural born status, which was not clarified in the Constitution. Not only that, Donofrio was using a pretty obscure interpretation of natural born, which had never been used before. The SCOTUS obviously decided that his interpretation did not have merit. This is far different from failing to follow the constitution.
I got you, but there has to come a time when you ask why aren't distinguished conservative lawyers like Gonzalez, Ted Olsen, Ashcroft, any from Reagan admin, or from Bush defense team during Bush v Gore touching this? Seems only the loons, losers, and 911 truthers are stepping forward to challenge this. Having 911 truthers like Berg and Corsi lead the charge only benefits Obama.
FROM Leo http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
DONOFRIO APPLICATION DENIED - WROTNOWSKI APPLICATION STILL PENDING
Posted in Uncategorized on December 8, 2008 by naturalborncitizen
My application was denied. The Honorable Court chose not to state why.
Wrotnowksi v. Connecticut Secretary of State is still pending as an emergency application resubmitted to the Honorable Associate Justice Antonin Scalia as of last Tuesday. I worked extensively on that application and it includes a more solid brief and a less treacherous lower Court procedural history.
After six days, it’s interesting that Scalia neither denied it nor referred it to the full Court.
My case may have suffered from the NJ Appellate Division Judge having incorrectly characterized my original suit as a “motion for leave to appeal” rather than the “direct appeal” that it actually was. On Dec 21 I filed official Judicial misconduct charges with the NJ Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, and I updated SCOTUS about that by a letter which is part of SCOTUS Docket as of Dec. 22. The NJ Appellate Divison official case file is fraudulent.
On the chance that SCOTUS was looking at both my case and Cort’s case, I must stress that Cort’s case does not have the same procedural hang up that mine does. It may be that without a decision on the Judicial misconduct allegation correcting the NJ Appellate Division case file, SCOTUS might have been in the position of not being able to hear my case as it would appear that my case was not before them on the proper procedural grounds.
I did file a direct appeal under the proper NJ Court rules, but the lower Court judge refused to acknowledge that and if his fraudulent docketing was used by SCOTUS they would have a solid procedural basis to throw mine out.
I don’t know if it’s significant that Cort’s case was not denied at the same time as mine. His case argues the same exact theory - that Obama is not a natural born citizen because he was a British citizen at birth.
All eyes should now be closely watching US Supreme Court Docket No. 08A469, Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz.
If Cort’s application is also denied then the fat lady can sing. Until then, the same exact issue is before SCOTUS as was in my case. Cort’s application before SCOTUS incorporates all of the arguments and law in mine, but we improved on the arguments in Cort’s quite a bit as we had more time to prepare it.
I was in a rush to get mine to SCOTUS before election day, which I did do on Nov. 3.
Cort’s case has a much cleaner lower court procedural history.
I’m not trying to play with people’s minds here. SCOTUS has not updated Cort’s docket and until they do there can be no closure. I was expecting, if they didn’t grant certiorari, that they would deny both cases at the same time so as to provide closure to the underlying issue. I hate to read tea leaves, but Cort’s application is still pending. That’s all we can really say with any certainty.
Leave A Comment »
Can anyone tell if there is any other part of the constitution, that the individual does not have standing?
If an individual doesn’t have standing who the heck does?
How can federal agencies blatantly ignore the constitution without a course of redress.
If 4 conservative justices decided that this isn’t important enough to make a ruling, then God help us as Obama gets two marxist judges on the bench.
The only thing that we might be able to prove, is that since he was not legally able to be sworn in as President, that no law signed by him can be binding. We might have to wait until he signs something and then take it through the courts.
Please remember that Leo helped Cort draw his papers, and Leo said Cort’s was the better case. Keyes case should be showing up at the SC today - fast tracked through CA courts at the end of last week. Although I fervently hoped for SCOTUS to protect us from a constitutional crisis, I believe the steps that need to be taken actually fall to the Congress. This should be an interesting chess game to watch.
What they might be saying is that until he is sworn in - there is no problem. Once sworn in, the first piece of legislation that he vetos and the first Presidential executive order that he puts into place it is back to the Supreme Court because anyone and everyone is affected by a fraud being elected, but we can’t show harm until that happens. No law has been broken yet.
Jees if this is let stand and that skinny big eared weasel never has to show his birth certificate, or prove where he was born, that means that the next president might be a terrorist from madigascar - as long as he is a liberal Democrat.
Even if he is a loon, his case may still be stronger. The court hears cases, not people. See ga medic, The_Reader_David and Jack Black’s comments.
Plus he did sound good on the radio and so he made the case to the public best. Even a loon can do right.
Does any one know if there have been any supreme court decisions when the prosecuting attorney turns out to have not been qualified or was found not to be an attorney?
The cases are overturned and have to be retried don’t they?
Chalk my comment up to total frustration of 'what is happening in our country'.
People's perception of history starts with the day they are born (Rush Limbaugh). Being 69 years old my perception is now full of fear for the country our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren are going to inherit.
Soviet despot Nikita Khrushchev observed that America’s transition from liberty to serfdom would have to be incremental: “We can’t expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism.”
BHO leans so far left he is true to his upbringing of being a Liberal/Socialist/Progressive/Marxist/Leninist.
GOD help us all!!!
The illogical road that we are about to embark on, seemingly to be followed by our "conservative" leaders, defy the values they espouse, specifically, their love for America and for which she stands. Yes I will and do question their patriotism.
Have they sold their soul to the devil himself for the power, or at least the road to achieving it again? Are they afraid of 0 and his henchmen? I dunno.
I don't mean to sit here and cry in my beer, though if I were to start drinking again, this would certainly seem to be a fit time, but any hope I had for this Country have just about evaporated.
It's time for the tree of liberty to be watered.
In 2001 he demanded the disbarment of U.S. Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas due to their participation in the case Bush v. Gore. This is in addition to the 911 truther suits. I don't know what your limit is but this along with the three thrown out 911 truther suits against Bush puhed him over the crazy line as far as I'm concerned. Wouldn't you rather see a distinguished conservative lawyer arguing this case rather than a loon who wants to prosecute President Bush and Cheney for causing 911? I remember when 911 Truthers were treated worse than liberals at FReepers now unbelievably some FReepers support them.
As the sun will rise in the morn be assured that the aforementioned justices will be sinisterly maligned by the [insert appropriate but disallowed term] here.
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.