Posted on 09/28/2009 7:59:14 PM PDT by Elderberry
Judge Carter granted Dr. Orly Taitz 10 days Leave.
(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...
I hope it something definitive. But I don’t know.
~~~Judge David Carter update .......... PING!
Here is the request that he just ruled on :
Plaintiffs’ L-R 7-10 Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply
To Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ Response to
Defendants’ September 4, 2009 Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiffs hereby move and request leave of court to file a surreply in response to Defendants’ Reply filed and served on Friday, September 25, 2009. Plaintiffs cite the following authority from the Local Rules of the Central District of California:
L.R. 7-10 Reply Papers. A moving party may, not later than the seventh calendar date (not excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays) before the date designated for the hearing of the motion, serve and file a reply memorandum, and declarations or other rebuttal evidence. Absent prior written order of the Court, the opposing party shall not file a response to the reply.
Plaintiffs submit that the Defendants have raised new matter in their reply which require an answer. Namely, the Defendants submit cast in a highly prejudicial light to the Plaintiffs’ cause, namely the orders of the Honorable Clay D. Land from the Middle District of Georgia.
It is true that Judge Land ruled in favor of defense in a case seeking stay of deployment of active duty military pending verification of Mr. Obama’s legitimacy for the position of the President and Commander in Chief. What is most important in that case, is that for the first time after over a 100 legal actions filed all over the Nation challenging Mr. Obama’s legitimacy for presidency, a judge in this case found standing, as judge Land got straight to the substance of the Plaintiffs’ case, assuming standing of the members of the military to challenge the legitimacy of the Commander in Chief, but deciding to exercise discretionary abstention on the issue of deployment. Most of the plaintiffs in this case before His Honor, judge Carter, are members of the military, and as such, based on the precedent set in Rhodes case, they have standing to challenge legitimacy of Mr. Obama, therefore contradicting the defendants’ main argument in the motion to dismiss, their claim that none of the plaintiffs have standing. The fact that Judge Land decided to abstain on the issue of deployment is irrelevant in this case, as it goes to the final disposition of the case, and whether the judiciary should abstain from reviewing a certain procedure within the military.
Furthermore, the Defendants assert that the Plaintiffs have not addressed the question of “redressability”, and this matter needs to be clarified in light of the Plaintiffs’ substantive due process contentions regarding the intersection of the First and Ninth Amendments as sources of the right of discrete and insular but politically powerless minorities to invoke strict scrutiny of obvious deviations from and therefore to enforce precisely and exactly the letter of the Constitution on the model of Flast v. Cohen and this charge requires a surreply.
Finally, the Defendants continue to misrepresent the Plaintiffs’ contentions regarding standing and how standing as a barrier to self-governing enforcement of the Constitution through Petition to Article III Courts (as advocated by the Defendants, in any case) would itself constitute a violation of Plaintiffs’ constitutional right to due process of law in the enforcement of the plain letter of the Constitution.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs’ pray, pursuant to L.R. 7-10, that they be allowed to file a surreply to Defendants’ response in this case, and even to do so as late as Thursday, October 1, 2009, especially since they are precluded from filing their Second Amended Complaint prior to the hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss by this Court’s Minute Order entered Thursday, September 24, 2009.
Respectfully submitted,
Saturday, September 26, 2009
You are busy busy! I can’t download from the phone (computer is in use right now)..so I appreciate all the information.
This answer is more to the point.
Motion < - Response < - Reply < - Sur-reply
I hope Orly has good attorneys who will do *ALL* the work for her and she can retrain herself in court.
Who is Devvy Kidd? Law firm?
Thanks for the ping. I hope this is good news.
I pray that she has been offered and has received all the help that she needs.
Thanks for the update!
These are the 2 motions to dismiss from Friday
Thats fine by me.
Then I am too. I thought she had 10 days until I read it. LOL
I did the same thing; only I didn’t read it at first.
You are right. Some judges will do this and I hope Orly realizes the gift she has been given.
......................Judge Carter is determined to decide the case on the merits in as expiditious a manner as possible..........................
I sure hope that Judge Carter’s life insurance is fully paid; that his wife doesn’t have to start his car; and that his kids don’t need to go to public school.
This guy’s in a real tough position.
The future world is on his shoulders, and he sees sniper rifles all around him, and what are those red/white/blue insignias on the sniper upper arms??
Is that the insignia of the Obamanation - Hope- Change, BS??
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.