Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dalight

I don’t think the reconsideration has to do primarily with eligibility, rather with atty Hemenway’s snookering the court or gettting one past them by making a motion for recusal of the two obama appointees. The court did not act on the motion so it should be granted. Accordingly they should be recused from this conference.

Whether they accept the case or not is still up for grabs. Two things of note, Abercrombie’s supposed statement there is no long form for Obama as well as the latest poll showing millions of Americans doubt Obamas place of birth. Despite trying to avoid the issue the SCOTUS will have to hear it sooner or later. The last consideration was about 30 days ago and the only significant news since then was Aercrombies and the new poll.

more info here
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2675406/posts


49 posted on 02/17/2011 9:53:02 PM PST by rolling_stone ( *this makes Watergate look like a kiddie pool*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rolling_stone

Despite trying to avoid the issue the SCOTUS will have to hear it sooner or later.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why would they “have to hear it”? I pray that you are right, but I don’t get why they would “have to hear it”?


283 posted on 02/19/2011 10:08:47 PM PST by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson