Replies

The Supreme Court refused each of those cases because they are not a Trier of Fact. They are a Judicial Review Court....ie they do not hear testimony arguing facts, they listen to arguements about points of law and how they are correctly applied to the case at hand....When a case is tried in one of the lower courts, the USSC will then take up the matter upon someone’s appeal and we will get a Constitutional ruling....not until then....I have full confidence that eventually it will reach our highest Court..... and Obama will be out on his ear!

I understand how the Supreme Court works and every one of the seven previous Obama eligibility cases that was sent to the Supreme Court had also worked its way up through the federal court system: District level and Court of Appeals level.
Still they were denied Writs of Certiorari under the Supreme Court’s tradition of “The Rule of Four” meaning there weren’t four of the nine justices agreeing to hear the constitutional issues in those cases before the full court. The Supreme Court actually hears about 1% of the cases that are sent to them.

Time will tell with regard to this latest attempt. I’ll leave the crystal ball gazing to you.

I don’t believe that any of the 7 cases (or for that matter any other case) was ever ruled on by lower courts....There has been no Court, at any level, that has actualy ruled that Obama is, or, is not, an NBC as per the US Constitution.

Of course I could have missed one .... could you provide me a link to any courts ruling on Obama’s NBC , so that I might educate myself, (and would love to read the ruling and it’s rational that Obama is an NBC).... A dismissal is NOT a Ruling....it is an acknowlegement of a defect in the suit’s filing....that says nothing of the underlying validity/non validity of the central question of Obama’s NBC eligibility...

Judge Carter, in dismissing Alan Keys suit, indicated that the proper court to bring his (Keyes) suit was the DC District Court and filed as a Quo Warrento brief.....have there been any cases so brought, and RULED upon? Or are attorneys so deaf that none have been filed?

In the cases you cite the plaintiffs sent their briefs directly to the USSC without fixing the defects in their filings, or by filing in the proper court, believing the validity of the brief would overcome the process....
It is therefore no wonder the Supremes refused to issue a Writ of Cert......as I said they are not a Trier of Fact....there must be a ruling of a lower court first....

Chief Justice Roberts’ fumbling of Obama’s Oath of Office, not once, but twice, tells me that he realizes Obama does not meet Constitutional Presidential requirements... maintaining Judicial decorum proved difficult for him......

Removing Obama must follow an orderly process with all i’s dotted and t’s crossed because of a prescedent setting removal of a sitting President by judicial ruling...It must be done with very strict, and within very narrow, grounds, because an intemperate ruling would wreck havoc upon our tradition of orderly Executive Office power transfer....a consideration that in the end, may outweigh the question of ruling upon Obama’s eligibility........

My crystal ball broke decades ago when I was 7...... Nonetheless I can still see farther than the ground directly in front of me......