Wrotnowski Application to SCOTUS Denied by Ginsburg

Supreme Court of The United States ^ | November 26, 2008 | Supreme Court of The United States

[Deepest End]

No. 08A469 Title: Cort Wrotnowski, Applicant v. Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State

Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Connecticut Case Nos.: (SC 18264)

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nov 25 2008 Application (08A469) for stay and/or injunction, submitted to Justice Ginsburg. Nov 26 2008 Application (08A469) denied by Justice Ginsburg.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioner: Cort Wrotnowski 1057 North Street (202) 862-8554 Greenwich, CT 06831 Party name: Cort Wrotnowski Attorneys for Respondent: Richard Blumenthal Attorney General (860) 808-5316 Office of the Attorney General 55 Elm Street P.O. Box 120 Hartford, CT 06141-0120 Party name: Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State

[Deepest End]

This application for stay can now be resubmitted to a justice of choice. Perhaps Scalia? Or another for Thomas?

[InterceptPoint]

As predicted by myself and others here at good old FR.

[EggsAckley]

Is it just me that has no clue at all what this thread is about?

(maybe the turkey tryptophane is still working)

[cripplecreek]

Not exactly unexpected.

[garykfd]

I’m afraid so

[RegulatorCountry]

It was my understanding that Wrotnowski had to submit to Ginsberg, and that denial was anticipated. I suspect resubmission will go to Scalia. No reason to put all the eggs in one basket with Thomas.

[Centurion2000]

Is it just me that has no clue at all what this thread is about?

It's another BC lawsuit against Obama filed and submitted to Ginsburg. She rejected it, so now the petitioner can submit it to any Justice. I think Scalia would make a good second choice on this.

[garykfd]

I think EVERYONE knew that was coming!!

[Diogenesis]

[RegulatorCountry]

Is it just me that has no clue at all what this thread is about?

It's another election eligibility lawsuit, similar to Donofrio in New Jersey, but this one is out of Connecticut. Some regard it as an improvement upon Donofrio.

Does this help? If you haven't been following this, it might not, lol.

[SandRat]

Clueless Ruth “BUZZY” Ginzberg.

[Frantzie]

I think I would try Scalia or Alito. Maybe Thomas is the right way to go.

Anyone who thinks that SCOTUS should punt on this is wrong. Leo makes a good case that the GOP/DNC and legislative branch (sec of state, Pelosi & Sentate McCain resolution) have essentially conned the electorate and help an illegal election.

We have three branches of govt - judicial, legislative and executive. McCain/Obama campaigns are essentially executive - really the President but they were essentially president to be. Obama most likely is ineligible as is McCain. Both campaigns helped by the DNC/RNC engaged in this fraud on the electorate.

This Executive Branch (to be) was assisted by the Legislative Branch including Secretaries of State, Pelosi (saying Obama is elegible) and the Sente passing a meaningless & illegal resolution saying McCain was elegible.

So we have the Exective (to be) and Legislative branches of govt defrauding the eletorate (voters) and violatining the Constitution.

The Framers made sure to have a third leg in Judicial to check the others power. Each branch was designed to check each other’s power. So not we have the Executive (to be) and Legislative defrauding the electorate and the only firewall to stop them is the Judicial or SCOTUS. They should NOT punt or run awy from this case. This is WHY SCOTUS is THERE! This is WHY the Framers had three branches of govt.

[muawiyah]

So we now have the Court’s pre-eminent Leftwingtard “selecting the President”.

[Lancey Howard]

I’m sure it was some Democrat clerk who got rid of this.
Ginsburg was probably napping.

[Frantzie]

True. Ginsberg is the Justice over CT. Last night Leo pointed out that there is a case or opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens that essentially supported Leo and Cort’s cases. Leo said, and he is right, that just because a Justice is labeled as “liberal” that they would not be supportive of his case. I have seen exampls of this in some cases.

[Deepest End]

Sorry Eggs, my fault for assuming this was well known.

SCOTUS application for stay filed by Cort Wrotnowski v. Conneticut Sectretary of State. Natural Born Citizen eligibility.

See: http://thenaturalborncitizen.blogspot.com/2008/11/treason-at-scotus-bickell-guilty-of.html

[Not A Snowbird]

Is it just me that has no clue at all what this thread is about?

I guess we didn't get the memo.

I'm assuming it has something to do with Obama's birth certificate. But I've been wrong before.

[garykfd]

I have a theory about the reasoning for “buzzy” rejecting the petitions. I think she’s afraid of them because she’s afraid she’ll have to vote to have nobama disqualified. Not because she thinks they’re frivolous.. whatcha think??

[teletech]

Ginsburg punts the US Constitution. I’m shocked I tell ta just SHOCKED! /s

[Frantzie]

I listened to Leo last night on Plains Radio. He mentioned a case or ruling by John Paul Stevens, the oldest justice and also a Lib. Stevens opinion in a case supported Leo’s case. Leo said just because a Justice is Liberal does not mean they will not take this case on and defend the Constitution. My opinion is if Stevens backed this position in an earlier case then he will be hard pressed to reverse himself.

Leo talked about additional research where a listener to Plains Radio found some powerful stuff from one of the writers of the 14th Amendment defining Natural Born Citizen (as required by Constitution to become POTUS). The requirement included both parents need to be American citizens.