Posted on 11/20/2008 8:28:49 AM PST by Candor7
On December 5, 2008, only ten days before the electoral college votes, the nine Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court will meet in private to review Obama's citizenship status.
Leo Donofrio's case, "Leo C. Donofrio, v. Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey, United States Supreme Court Docket No. 08A407," regarding Obama's citizenship has reached a new level. The case has been "distributed for conference."
This docketing today by the court should send ripples of fear through the Obama camp. Obama has been proceeding at lightening speed to put together a cabinet and take possession of the White House with the hope that he won't have to answer the question of whether or not he was "at birth" a "natural born citizen."
Every major news network, print and cable news like FOX, CNN and MSNBC, have ignored all the court cases challenging Obama's eligibility as sore losers or conspiracy theories. It might be in their best interest at this point to report this critically important meeting to take place on December 5, 2008, or lose what little credibility they have left.
If four of the nine Justices vote to hear the case in full review, oral argument may be ordered. The conference is scheduled for December 5, 2008, ten days before the meeting of the Electoral College…
The case originally sought, pre-election, to have the names of Barack Obama, John McCain, and Roger Calero removed from New Jersey ballots, and for a stay of the "national election" pending Supreme Court review of whether those candidates were eligible under the Constitution as natural born Citizens, as is required by Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States.
Leo Donofrio brought his case from a lower New Jersey court to the NJ Supreme Court -- was denied -- and then he filed an emergency stay application in the United States Supreme Court on Nov. 3, 2008, before the Honorable Associate Justice David Souter. Justice Souter denied the emergency stay application on Nov. 6.
Leo Donofrio renewed the application, as per Supreme Court Rule 22.4, to the Honorable Associate Justice Clarence Thomas by way of Express mail on Nov. 14. The application arrived at the Supreme Court on Nov. 17 and was submitted directly to Justice Thomas.
On Nov. 19, the case was docketed for full conference of all nine Justices and scheduled for December 5, 2008. It is not known at this time the exact details of how the case came to be "DISTRIBUTED for Conference".
Background on "The Justices Conference" is discussed as follows by the Supreme Court Historical Society:
"No outsider enters the room during conference. The junior Associate Justice acts as "doorkeeper," sending for reference material, for instance, and receiving it at the door...
Five minutes before conference time, 9:30 or 10 a.m., the Justices are summoned. They exchange ritual handshakes and settle down at the long table. The Chief sits at the east end; the other Justices sit at places they have chosen in order of their seniority…
The Chief Justice opens the discussion, summarizing each case. The senior Associate Justice speaks next, and comment passes down the line. To be accepted for review, a case needs only four votes, fewer than the majority required for a decision on the case itself. Counsel for the litigants are directed to submit their printed briefs so that each Justice has a set several weeks before argument.
Certificate of Live Birth?
Oh, of course! Thanks.
Can you please add me to the list?
thx.
Ur Welcome :)
Even if 100 people showed up with a video tape of Obama’s birth in Kenya or wherever, and swore they witnessed it, and produced an original Kenyan birth certificate, this case would go nowhere. In fact, it would go nowhere so fast that the media would totally ignore it, and everyone from the metro DC area would spend every waking hour diminishing the credibility of the sources.
No one in this government would force this issue and the resulting Constitutional crisis and nationwide rioting and civil unrest that would occur.
No one. Period.
Besides, I think this whole issue is the last gasp of desperation from people that cannot face the fact that 650 million dollars and propagandistic expertise gained over the past 100 years bought the White House for an empty suit cypher. And the people responsible for that coup would not take the chance that they could have wasted their time and money to lose on a technicality.
On February 6th, 1990, Obama became the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review. The job is considered the highest student position at Harvard Law School.
He manages to serve as president of the Harvard Law Review without ever publishing a SINGLE piece of signed, written work — not one!
Update: Politico claims that an unsigned — and previously unattributed — 1990 article was produced by Obama and offers a glimpse at his views on abortion policy and the law during his student days, and provides a rare addition to his body of work.
The six-page summary, tucked into the third volume of the year’s Harvard Law Review, considers the charged, if peripheral, question of whether fetuses should be able to file lawsuits against their mothers. Obama’s answer: No.
I sent Politico an email asking how they knew the document was produced by Obama, since it is “unsigned — and previously unattributed.” They never responded.
Obama’s timing, however, was better than his writing. In the same spring 1990 term that he would stand for the presidency, the Harvard Law School found itself embroiled in an explosive racial brouhaha.
Black firebrand law professor Derrick Bell was demanding that the Harvard Law School appoint a black woman to the law faculty.
This protest would culminate in vigils and protests by the racially sensitive student body, in the course of which Obama would compare the increasingly absurd Bell to Rosa Parks.
Feeling the pressure, HLR editors wanted to elect their first African American president. Obama had an advantage. Spared the legacy of slavery and segregation, and having grown up in a white household, he lacked the hard edge of many of his black colleagues.
“Obama cast himself as an eager listener,” the New York Times reported, “sometimes giving warring classmates the impression that he agreed with all of them at once.”
In February 1990, after an ideologically charged all day affair, Obama’s fellow editors elected him president from among 19 candidates. As it happened, Obama prevailed only after the HLR’s small conservative faction threw him its support.
Obama was elected after a meeting of the review’s 80 editors that convened Sunday and lasted until early this morning, a participant said.
Until the 1970’s the editors were picked on the basis of grades, and the president of the Law Review was the student with the highest academic rank. Among these were Elliot L. Richardson, the former Attorney General, and Irwin Griswold, a dean of the Harvard Law School and Solicitor General under Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon.
Curiously, once elected, Obama contributed not one signed word to the HLR or any other law journal. As Matthew Franck has pointed out in National Review Online, “A search of the HeinOnline database of law journals turns up exactly nothing credited to Obama in any law review anywhere at any time. “After his appointment, the NY Times carried a story in February 1990, which included a few quotes from Obama:
“The fact that I’ve been elected shows a lot of progress,” Mr. Obama said today in an interview. “It’s encouraging.” “But it’s important that stories like mine aren’t used to say that everything is O.K. for blacks. You have to remember that for every one of me, there are hundreds or thousands of black students with at least equal talent who don’t get a chance,” he said, alluding to poverty or growing up in a drug environment...
On his goals in his new post, Mr. Obama said: “I personally am interested in pushing a strong minority perspective. I’m fairly opinionated about this. But as president of the law review, I have a limited role as only first among equals.” Therefore, Mr. Obama said, he would concentrate on making the review a “forum for debate,” bringing in new writers and pushing for livelier, more accessible writing.
Unlike most editors, and likely all its presidents, Obama was not a writer. During his tenure at Harvard, he wrote only one heavily edited, unsigned note.
In this note for the third volume of the 1990 HLR, he argued against any limits on abortion, citing the government’s interest in “preventing increasing numbers of children from being born in to lives of pain and despair.” Well, the new system, disputed when it began, was meant to help insure that minority students became editors of The Law Review.
And, it worked!
In other words, Obama was the first affirmative action President of the Harvard Law Revue.
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaEducation.htm
Nope. It's not but the people elected a Dem. And it's common sense. They wouldn't be overturning the whole election just Obama's selection.
The electors are chosen by the states; unless there's something in state law that I don't know about,
Some states have laws on faithless electors. They are listed in post 174. And I was told that Obama picked his state electors from the party faithful. They are truly "his" electors. If he's disqualified it would stand to reason that electors sworn to him would also be disqualified.
Yes nully. She was wearing shoes. :-)
You'll have to point that part of the Constitution out to me because I can't see where it defines natural born citizen at all.
Congess has legislated that a natural born citizen is one born in the United States and subject to our laws. The 14th Amendment says the same thing. If Obama was born in Hawaii then he certainly meets that requirement. And the Supreme Court ruled in an 1898 case that the citizenship of the parents was irrelevant, that if the child is born in the U.S. to parents who are citizens of another country, that person still is a natural born U.S. citizen. Justice Gray, writing for the majority, stated:
"The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: The fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes. The amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born within the territory of the United States of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory."
If Obama was born here then he's a natural born U.S. citizen. And if you think the Supreme Court is going to take this case up, or overturn precedent going back 110 years and throw the 14th Amendment out the window, then you're deluding yourself.
“Clinton’s quote is always in the back of my mind””
Bill Clinton Hurls Constitution Qualifications Bomb at Obama
August 08, 2008.....”The Constitution sets qualifications for the president, and then the people decide who they think would be the better president”.
Was President Clinton signaling a hidden meaning in his remark?”
Of course Clinton knows there is a serious problem with elligibility. Remember Obama’s crack during the campaign about his opponent searching into his Kindergarten records?
That was Obama’s shot back at Clinton to back-off. Once they found his BC sealed, they went for the elementary school records. According to the DOE in Hawaii, they have no records for him, yet he appears in a class photo.
The Clinton’s and all other researchers are likely 8-10 years too late in terms of getting their hands on primary documents. Too bad the early school records are missing. They would have provided a copy of the BC, place and DOB, and full shot records that confirm the DOB.
Amazingly, Phil Berg, the Democrat attorney has still been able to gather enough other evidence that will reveal the true state of events and displace the incoming usurper prior to his swearing in ceremony.
It’s actually API not AFI. But we now know it was a scam. The African Press International (API) claimed it had a tape recording of phone conversation with Michelle Obama that was very damaging. Articles kept get posted here on it and this API kept declaring the release of the damaging tape was imminent. People kept wanting to believe that it was the silver bullet to stop Obama. Many knew it was a scam, but it was sort of humerous to see every day the new excuse why they hadn’t yet released this political landscape change tape.
Think Nigerian e-mail scam and you’ll get the picture.
Shades of Dred Scott. Look at your definition for a moment and take a look at someone like Rudy Giuliani. Second generation Italian-American on both sides of his family. By your definition, unless you can prove that all four of Giuliani's grandparents were naturalized as U.S. citizens before Giuliani's parents were born then either Guiliani's mother or father or both were not born U.S. citizens. And in that case, unless you can show where they went through the naturalization process then they never became U.S. citizens. And therefore Giuliani himself, by your definition, cannot be a natural born U.S. citizen because both his parents were not. Now, does that make any sense at all to you?
BTW, you neglected to mention the “Left Angeles Times” going bankrupt as well (lol). The “Left Angeles Times” is the voice of Obama and gay rights activists in California and a significant number of people just won’t read that.
http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244
Yeah. I saw them once they were pointed out...
My my! Those shoes really did get around!
We should publish an Liberal Rag NAME LIST, just for the fun of it.
AP is prety difficult to name, its only two letters, but "A$$ Pucks" will do for me.
The TRUTH depends on what the definition of IS really is.This maxim was proposed and adopted by William Jesterphone Crimpon. The news has not been the same since, and they create collectively a very dangerous alternate political reality, where ideology trumps what must be dealt with on the ground.( We have to have an energy policy> Gawd, we will have one, a politically correct national energy policy, a green based one, where oil=eeeevil, nuclear=eeeeeevil,coal=eeeeevil,wood=eeeeevil, geothermal=eeeeevil, but where wind, solar and surprisingly natural gas = good, no transition either!)
So the world promises their eventual destruction , as the dinosaurs that they are, over specialized, narrow, and with out an ounce of common sense. The entire cadre is way too elite for common sense, whcih is why they hate Sarah Palin with a passion unrivaled by the anything but the wrong headed revisionist liberal scourge of McCarthy.)
I look foprward to thei demise. And its only a matter of time, but we will have to survive their predations.
You will have to ask Ms. LucyT, who has the COLB Ping list.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.