[rxsid]

Ping!

"Supremes challenged to put Constitution above Twitter (re: Hollister vs. Soetoro)"

[HiTech RedNeck]

Twoth the Raven, “Nevermore!”

[Jacquerie]

Further, his signature on every law passed while he occupies the Oval Office is not valid if he is not constitutionally eligible to occupy that office de jure

Prepare to be disappointed.

[Fresh Wind]

Twit: (noun) A silly, annoying person, a fool.

Twitter: (noun) A sillier, more annoying person, even more foolish.

[UCFRoadWarrior]

Where are Rush, Beck, Hannity, Levin, etal...on this? Are they still siding with Obama on the Birther issue by refusing to honestly discuss this?

If you ain’t an Obama Birther....you will be an Obama supporter

[rxsid]

The questions suggested by the petition are weighty:

#"Did the district court examine the complaint, as required by the decisions of this and every other federal court, to see if it alleged facts to support its claims?"

#"By refusing to consider the issue of defendant Obama not being a 'natural born citizen' as set out in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, did the district court violate its obligations to consider the issues raised by the complaint?"

#"In … relying on extrajudicial criteria such as an assertion that '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' combined with an attack on petitioner … did the district court not engage in such obvious political bias and upon extrajudicial factors as to render its opinion void?"

#"Did the … bias engaged in lead to a decision which ignored the law as set out above and as a result place the respondent-defendant Obama above that law and the rule of law in this country generally and threaten the constitutional basis and very existence of our rule of law?"

#"Did the courts below not completely ignore the decisions of this court and the clear language of Rule 15 of the federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning amendments so as to compound its biased elevation of the defendant Obama above the rule of constitutional law?"

While the district judge dismissed the case because it had been "twittered," the appeals court simply adopted his reasoning, but wouldn't even allow its opinion affirming the decision to be published, the petition explains.

[hershey]

Exactly.

[Menehune56]

"If proven true, those allegations mean that every command by the respondent Obama and indeed every appointment by respondent Obama, including the appointment of members [Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor] of this and every other court, may be only de facto but not de jure [by right of law]," states the pleading.

This possibility is why SCOTUS will probably continue to evade the issue even though by doing so they are failing utterly to step up to their constitutional responsibilities and this will reflect poorly on them in future history of the era. I hope I'm wrong but I've lived long enough to think this is the most likely legal scenario. There's always the possibility of the catastrophic revelation however...

[rambo316]

Bumb later for reading

[SpaceBar]

Our lifetime appointed shuffleboard team won’t tip over the apple cart.

[plangent]

Since Sotomayor and Kagan are creatures of Obama, is it proper for them to recuse themselves from the vote? Thus leaving seven justices to decide?

[M Kehoe]

All of this will go away once we see the COLB...if there is one.

5.56mm

[FrdmLvr]

Anyone know the answer to this one? If the individual states pass laws stating that all presidential candidates must prove their citizenship by producing their birth certificate in order to be placed on that state’s ballot (I think Texas has recently passed such a law), how will 0bama get around it? Will his fake birth certificate be quietly accepted?

[ridesthemiles]

EVERY Executive Order would also be invalid.

[tutstar]

The document also explains that both Robertson and Obama have "held management positions on boards of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law, and thus are acquainted with each other. There is every appearance of bias here," it said.

I don't recall reading this in any of the other articles on the subject.

[SunkenCiv]

"If proven true, those allegations mean that every command by the respondent Obama and indeed every appointment by respondent Obama, including the appointment of members [Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor] of this and every other court, may be only de facto but not de jure [by right of law]," states the pleading. "Further, his signature on every law passed while he occupies the Oval Office is not valid if he is not constitutionally eligible to occupy that office de jure," it continued.

That *could* explain why his major domestic policy initiatives have been unconstitutional on their face. Thanks rxsid.

"Constititution? I don't neeed no steeekeeeng Constitution!"

[Jack Black]

If this goes to the Supreme Court will Kagen and Sotomayer recuse themselves? No, I don’t think they will.

[bushpilot1]

PART II - CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH
2. Citizenship by birth

Every person who, having been born in Sierra Leone before the nineteenth day of April, 1971, or who was resident in Sierra Leone on the eighteenth day of April, 1971, and not the subject of any other State shall, on the nineteenth day of April, 1971, be deemed tobe a citizen of Sierra Leone by birth:

Provided that-

(a)his father or his grandfather was born in Sierra Leone; and

(b)he is a person of negro African descent;

http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/refworld/rwmain?page=search&docid=3ae6b50610&skip=&query=Sierra%20Leone%20Citizenship%20Act%201973

[bushpilot1]

“Because a Constitutional crisis is just what this nation needs right now”

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2010/11/vattel.html