why is it stronger?
According to Leo’s blog:
“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 Nov. 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 Nov. 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.”
why is it stronger?
***
I read Wrotnowski’s brief earlier today - among other things, he is claiming judicial error at BOTH the Connecticut Superior Court AND the Connecticut Supreme Court ...
They denied his application because they said he had no standing under Connecticut General Statutes Section 9-323 ...
Trouble is, he DID NOT file his application under that statute ...
SCOTUS MIGHT have to kick this back to the Connecticut courts ...
why is it stronger?
More time and effort went into preparing a far more detailed brief that makes arguments which were missing in Leo’s brief.