So Much at Stake

FYI

The SCOTUS better get on the ball and do it quick. Bambi is heading down the Socialist road at warp speed.

Is her name seriously Orly?

What’s the over/under on owls in this thread?

ping for later

Be there!

Thanks for the ping.

Please clarify -- I haven't heard a definitive answer. Was the "Suggestion for recusal received from applicant" and "Supplemental brief of applicant Gail Lightfoot, et al. filed" definitely distributed in the Conference on Jan 23?

It appears the Supplemental Brief was distributed, but not sure if one full day was enough processing time for distribution; normally the SCOTUS needs 10 days of review without a waiver. She hand-delivered it to the SCOTUS late on Jan 21. See her blog here: SCOTUS Docket System Backonline

Additionally, the "Suggestion for Recusal," IMO, is a very important part of this case, and could have a bearing on future cases. This may explain Alito's non-participation in the POTUS-SCOTUS meeting and Inauguration.

http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a524.htm

No. 08A524

Title:

Gail Lightfoot, et al., Applicants

v.

Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State

Docketed:

Lower Ct:

Supreme Court of California

Case Nos.:

(S168690)

~~~Date~~~	~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dec 12 2008	Application (08A524) for a stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Dec 17 2008	Application (08A524) denied by Justice Kennedy.
Dec 29 2008	Application (08A524) refiled and submitted to The Chief Justice.
Jan 7 2009	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 23, 2009.
Jan 7 2009	Application (08A524) referred to the Court.
Jan 13 2009	Suggestion for recusal received from applicant.
Jan 22 2009	Supplemental brief of applicant Gail Lightfoot, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Jan 26 2009	Application (08A524) denied by the Court.

What do you know about:

Jan 13 2009 Suggestion for recusal received from applicant.

Right here Mama:

http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/very-important-petition-filed-with.html

Excerpt:

SUGGESTION OF RECUSAL OF HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS AND HONORABLE ASSOCIATE JUSTICES FROM SWEARING OF BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ON JANUARY 20TH DUE TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH THE FULL COURT CONFERENCE HEARING ON HE 23RD OF JANUARY OF LIGHTFOOT V BOWEN, SEEKING TO FIND BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PRESIDENCY

More at link.

Thanks Cal. BP2 Calpernia has posted information that may give you the answer. Cal may know more if you frmail. You are both on the same side different facets.

She is calling for an investigation.

http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/urgent-need-affidavits-for-motion-to.html
Urgent-need affidavits for motion to compel for the Supreme Court, Senate and Congressional Judicial committee hearings and FBI and US attorney

For immediate press release
01.26.09.

Dear fellow Americans and Patriots,
as you probably know, in my case Lightfoot v Bowen I filed a petition for emergency stay and asked it to be treated as a writ of certiorari based on Bush v Gore 2000 precedent. The Supreme Court has logged this petition as an application for stay pending filing a writ of certiorari. Since they denied the emergency petition today, it gives me an opportunity to file immediately the actual Writ of Certiorari and it will be done within a few days.
However, a number of things have transpired lately.

First, an exparte private closed door meeting between 8 out of 9 Justices of the Supreme Court (Justice Samuel Alito was not present) with Mr. Barry Soetoro-Barack Hussein Obama. I will file a motion to the Chief Jastice to compel the records of this private meeting, that was held only a few days before my case was supposed to be heard, where the plaintiffs state that Mr. Soetoro-Obama is illegitimate for presidency due to the fact that his father was a foreign subject and there is no evidence that Mr. Obama was really born in Hawaii, since the state of Hawaii statute 338 allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to obtain Hawaiian certification of live birth and such certification can be obtained based on an affidavit of one relative only. In spite of 32 legal actions filed around the country, Mr. Soetoro-Obama refused to provide his original birth certificate that is sealed in Hawaii, no hospital in Hawaii could find any records of Mr. Obama ever being born there and affidavits were given by a number of parties in Kenya, stating that he was born in Kenya. We believe that Mr. Obama has spent over $800,000 on numerous attorneys to keep his original birth certificate sealed, because the original vault birth certificate does not provide any corroborating evidence from any hospital about him being born there.

Additionally, Mr. Obama has immigrated to Indonesia as a child with his mother and step-father Lolo Soetoro and his school records from Indonesia show his legal name to be Barry Soetoro, citizen of Indonesia. Due to the fact that Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, Mr. Soetoro -Obama’s parents had to relinquish his US citizenship in order to obtain his Indonesian Citizenship. There is ample evidence that Mr. Soetoro-Obama has travelled on his Indonesian passport up to the time he became US Senator, whereby he reaffirmed his Indonesian citizenship as an adult.

The swearing of Mr. Obama is null and void due to the fact that he was sworn in on a name that is not legally his name and he is a foreign subject from birth and now and never qualified as a Natural Born US Citizen

On Wednesday, January the 21st, when the Supreme Court reopened for business after inauguration, somebody deleted from the external docket all information about my case.
Millions of people around the country and around the world watched that docket. A number of concerned parties have called the Supreme Court and got no explanation. Other cases were on the docket. Finally, information about my case was re-entered on the docket. I will be demanding from the Chief Justice John Roberts an immediate full investigation, as to how the information about a case of National and World importance, dealing with Mr Soetoro- Obama’s illegitimacy for Presidency, disappeared from the docket of the Supreme Court. Incidentally an article about me and the cases I am handling, has disappeared from the Wikipedia. A copy of this letter will be forwarded to the Congressional and Senatorial Judicial committees for full investigation and hearing as well as FBI and US attorney’s offices.

I would ask all of the citizens that observed this disappearing and reappearing of information on the docket of SCOTUS to write affidavits to that extend. Please go to the nearest UPS store. They usually have notary public on the premises. Have your signature notarised and have the affidavit scanned and e-mailed to me.

Watergate investigation started with a small hotel braking. Obamagate Congressional and Senatorial investigation will start with this breaking into the computer system of the Supreme Court of the United States and illegal deletion of all the information about my case from the external public docket.

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

Orly & I respectfully disagree about “suggestion for recusal.” Must say it was a bold move.

Just so BP will see your comment.

ok let me clarify my pov. I am glad CJJR “swore” bo in the manner that he did but please don't ask me why because I can't tell being self-sworn to secrecy for allegiance to my Country.

Man, Andrew Berg plays a mean fiddle.

“You can't always get what you want...”

The three verses (along with the varied theme in the 4th verse) address the major topics of the 1960s: love, politics, and drugs.

Speaking for myself alone, this is an issue particularly non-political, not unlike your tagline.

Love Life & Liberty. Back to mill for me.

I posted this question to Hoosiermama privately, but have her okay to bring it out here to ponder, in light of the response on this thread:

I still think Alito is crucial in the outcome of these cases. I still cannot believe that his reason for not participating in BOTH the SCOTUS-POTUS meeting and the Inauguration is because he was a pouty brat or as a sign of protest. Sorry, just can’t see that.

We’ve seen cases come from the SCOTUS where LESS than ALL of the 9 Justices rule. That’s normally because of a vacancy due to death, awaiting Senate confirmation.

However, does the SCOTUS have rules in place for recusal? I would think they must.

Let’s think of a crazy scenario: Let’s say that one of the Justice’s family members is brutally slain, and later, a STAY for the killer’s execution comes before the SCOTUS. Would that Justice be barred from ruling, because of that Justice’s own self-recusal, or because of standing rules of the SCOTUS/federal jurisprudence in general?

If the above example doesn’t work, think of any other scenario where a Justice (or multiple Justices) might have the APPEARANCE of not be able to render a fair and just ruling, because of their affiliation with the defendant or plaintiff ...

This is especially a “sticky wicket” for the HIGHEST Court in the land, where cases have NO WHERE ELSE to go for appeal. Justice is suppose to be blind, but the Justices are human, and despite their oaths and experience, still subject to partiality. The choices may be federal grand jury (as Leo has recently proposed) or Alito is “promoted” for a case against Obama as the “temporary” Chief Justice.

Hoosiermama’s response:

It is only if a case is before the justice that the must recuse themselves. For example, If Alito or his clerk had been the justice to open the sealed case to determine if the other justices needed to be aware of its content immediately, he would be the only one who would have to recuse himself from BO...He is the only one who has direct (Don’t remember legal term)_____________knowledge.

If the material in not eminent, but inevitable than he still must recluse himself until the case is heard. IMO he may have been the justice that was assigned to the sealed case. Just as we’ve seen various justice assigned to other BC cases before the court.

Primer on recusal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recusal

Any thoughts from the group on this?

“It is only if a case is before the justice that the must recuse themselves. For example, If Alito or his clerk had been the justice to open the sealed case to determine if the other justices needed to be aware of its content immediately, he would be the only one who would have to recuse himself from BO...He is the only one who has direct (Don’t remember legal term)_____________knowledge.

If the material in not eminent, but inevitable than he still must recluse himself until the case is heard. IMO he may have been the justice that was assigned to the sealed case. Just as we’ve seen various justice assigned to other BC cases before the court.”

Of this you can be certain, Justice Alito is NOT a brat or a wussy. Here is Justice Alito’s Bio:

“Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1990–2006); Professor, Seton Hall University School of Law (1999–2004); U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey (1987–1990); Deputy Assistant Attorney General (1985–1987); Assistant to the Solicitor General (1981–1985); Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey (1977–1981)”

Former Assistant U.S. Attorneys in New Jersey like Justice Alito are tough guys.