It is also possible that 3 of the most extremely liberal activist judges are now or have voted yes because they know they can weaken the US Constitution. They feel the justices in the middle will eventually go there way if they get the fourth vote.
In both cases, as a strict constitutionalist Supreme Court jurist, you "Evade" the Obama eligibility case by voting NO."
THAT, is very plausible RS! And as horrible as that may seem on the surface, it would actually be better IF the 4 "Constitutionalists" on the bench voted NO on pursuing it if they thought there was a good chance Kennedy would vote with the libs in their new world order, America is aweful, social justice payback, the Constitution is outdated mindset.
However, now that 2 sit on the bench as a direct action (nomination) by the usurper himself...perhaps, now...the odds just got much better IF they were to recuse themselves (one or both). I think the public at large would be more than outraged if they learned that neither recused themselves in such an eligibility case. The public is far, far more awake now...than, say...the summer of 2008!
Thinking back...were there any eligibility related cases docketed AFTER the two picks where installed (other than this one and Taitz's pending)? In other words, weren't all the others that have been "filled" in the circular filing cabinet done so prior to the Kagan and Sotomyor? What I'm getting at is perhaps you're on to something. Perhaps now, the issue is "ripe" (esp. post Nov. 2)? Guess we'll find out soon.
THAT, is very plausible RS! And as horrible as that may seem on the surface, it would actually be better IF the 4 “Constitutionalists” on the bench voted NO on pursuing it if they thought there was a good chance Kennedy would vote with the libs in their new world order, America is aweful, social justice payback, the Constitution is outdated mindset.
However, now that 2 sit on the bench as a direct action (nomination) by the usurper himself...perhaps, now...the odds just got much better IF they were to recuse themselves (one or both). I think the public at large would be more than outraged if they learned that neither recused themselves in such an eligibility case. The public is far, far more awake now...than, say...the summer of 2008!
Thinking back...were there any eligibility related cases docketed AFTER the two picks where installed (other than this one and Taitz’s pending)? In other words, weren’t all the others that have been “filled” in the circular filing cabinet done so prior to the Kagan and Sotomyor? What I’m getting at is perhaps you’re on to something. Perhaps now, the issue is “ripe” (esp. post Nov. 2)? Guess we’ll find out soon.
Petitioners submit their petitions to a single justice who then presents that petition to the other justices in a “cert conference.” If four justices believe that the full court should hear an appeal, then “Cert” is granted and the appeal is docketed for the full court. If “Cert” is denied on the petition submitted to one justice, plaintiffs will often resubmit the petition to another justice. The only “non-constitutionalist” justices to receive petitions for Writs of Certiorari in Obama eligibility appeals are former Justice David Souter and Ruth Bader-Ginsberg. All the other petitions went to Justices Alito, Roberts, Scalia or Thomas.
Since there are four strong “constitutionalists” on the current bench and there have been eight appeals of Obama eligiblity suits to reach the high court for “Cert” conferences, it appears that Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito have all not agreed that Obama eligibility issues should be granted a hearing before the full court. Kagan and Sotomayor are not needed to grant cert under the “rule of four.”
My guess is that Justice Roberts has recused himself since he administered the Oath of Office to Obama and Justice Thomas is “avoiding that issue” not wanting to be involved in removing the first African-American from the presidency. Justice Scalia is also on the record in another case as stating that “jus soli” is the intent of the natural born citizen clause and that leaves only Justice Alito (and the always unknown factor, Anthony Kennedy).
In the last action before the high court, both Justice Alito and Justice Thomas denied a Restraining Order to Orly Taitz who asked the high court to intervene in the $20,000 sanctions order against her by US District Court Judge Clay R. Land in Columbus, Georgia in Captain Pamela Barnett v Colonel MacDonald.
Captain Barnett was seeking to have her deployment orders to Iraq delayed under it was determined if Obama was eligible to give orders as Commander-in-Chief or not.