Gary, my premise was that the court was asked to rule whether the $20k fine was appropriate or not. On the merits, it may have been appropriate.
The court may not have been asked to rule on the merits of Taitz’s charges against Obama.
I don’t remember the particulars with regard to why the $20k fine first came down.
If so, we are doomed as a nation when the actions of the highest court in the land are more in line with American Idol than with the rule of law. We have truly lost our way.
However, on the other side, the original trial court judge is a former Republican Georgia state Senator who was recommended for his federal judgeship by Senator Saxby Chambliss and was apppointed to the US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia bench by President George W. Bush and Judge Land said of Orly Taitz’s behavior: “The Court finds that counsel’s conduct was willful and not merely negligent. It demonstrates bad faith on her part. As an attorney, she is deemed to have known better.”
The original plaintiff in this case was US. Army Flight Surgeon Captain Connie Rhodes who refused to deploy to Iraq until Obama proved his eligibility. When the trial court dimissed the complaint, Captain Rhodes deployed to Iraq and she sent a letter to the judge stating that she no longer wished to be represented by Orly Taitz after Taitz filed an appeal without asking Captain Rhodes’ permission.
Captain Rhodes wrote to Judge Land: “I do not wish for Ms. Taitz to file any future motions or represent me in any way in this court. It is my plan to file a complaint with the California State Bar due to her reprehensible and unprofessional actions.”
Judge Land imposed a $20,000 sanction on Ms. Taitz which has already been paid.
Today, the Supreme Court refused to hear oral arguments on the reversing the sanction.