No, that document had absolutely no impact on that particular judge's decision. That judge - Land I believe, granted defendant's motion dismiss for one reason - plaintiff's failed to meet the requisite obligation of standing. That's it.
Land then goes on to editorialize about the case generally - as judges almost always do, irrespective of granting MTD - in what is known as "orbiter dicta" which is Latin legal phrase translated as "said by the way". Dicta has absolutely no precedential value, at all. That's why it's called editorializing.
<>No, that document had absolutely no impact on that particular judge’s decision. That judge - Land I believe, granted defendant’s motion dismiss for one reason - plaintiff’s failed to meet the requisite obligation of standing. That’s it.<>
No — it was Judge Robertson, the twitter judge in the Hollister Case who wrote in his opinion:
“The issue of the president’s citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court”.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90955
What was presented to him from the internet influenced his decision by his own words.
No, that document had absolutely no impact on that particular judge's decision. That judge - Land I believe, granted defendant's motion dismiss for one reason - plaintiff's failed to meet the requisite obligation of standing. That's it.
Land then goes on to editorialize about the case generally - as judges almost always do, irrespective of granting MTD - in what is known as "orbiter dicta" which is Latin legal phrase translated as "said by the way". Dicta has absolutely no precedential value, at all. That's why it's called editorializing
---------------------------------------------------------------
Oh, of course not ODH. Judge land (Hollister v. Obama) is most definitely of sound mind when he editorialized that the issue had been "vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry"
Oh yeah, that is a brilliant piece of work there ya gotta admit. I mean, everybody knows that the way to address issues of national importance and determine the facts is by twittering and texting (oh, and massaging). In fact, that's how the majority of business deals get done. If you really think about it, how in the world did we as a nation ever survive prior to twitter?
IMO, Land should immediately be nominated for chief justice of the world court.
/s