Posted on 01/22/2009 1:22:47 PM PST by dascallie
"Activism, Eligibility, Kerchner v. Obama, POTUS » Kerchner v. Obama: Complaint, Petition Filed in NJ Federal District Court Thu, Jan 22, 2009
Mario Apuzzo, a New Jersey attorney, filed a case early Tuesday morning, a Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto:
On early Tuesday morning, January 20, 2009, at about 3:00 a.m., I filed a Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto on behalf of my clients, Mr. Kerchner, Mr. Patterson, Mr. LeNormand, and Mr. Nelsen, against defendants, Barack Hussein Obama II, United States of America, United States Congress, United States Senate, United States House of Representatives, Richard B. Cheney, and Nancy Pelosi. I filed the complaint in the Federal District Court of New Jersey and is now pending in Camden. It bears Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00253. The complaint seeks to learn the truth about whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and eligible to be President and Commander in Chief. On January 21, 2009, I filed an Amended Complaint for Emergency Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Mandamus, and Petition for Quo Warranto. The Complaint and the Amended Complaint can be accessed and viewed at the District Court of New Jersey and Pacer web site. I will also be uploading a copy of the documents at this blog site as soon as possible so that they may be more easily viewed.
The defendants have not yet been served. I am now in the process of requesting that the Court issue to me the summonses so that I can then serve as soon as possible the Summons and Amended Complaint on the defendants.
As you know, the courts have refused to reach the underlying merits of the many lawsuits that have been filed on the question of whether Mr. Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and eligible to be President and Commander in Chief. My clients and I hope that we will get a court to reach the underlying merits of this question so that the American people will be assured that Mr. Obama is their legitimate President and not an usurper. I will appreciate whatever comments anyone has on the merits of this lawsuit.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq."
The issue was decided by the voters, the electoral college and Congress. Apparently all of them felt he was "eligible". The courts are not going to touch this.
Get over it.
“I’m encouraging democrats to demand an Obama birthplace memorial.”
They already built one in Kenya.
How can we get the Border Patrol arrest and deport him as an illegal alien?
Unless he later filed to have it changed back. In which case the long form/vault copy would indicate that as well.
What does that have to do with the truth? The truth is what it is, regardless of whether a court chooses to find it, or observe it.
Do you want the truth?
The TRUTH is that Obama is the President of the United States.
That is the truth. Whether he could prove his "eligibility" is irrelevant at this point. "
The TRUTH is that no court in the United States is going to remove him from office, not even the SCOTUS.
The TRUTH is that the only Constitutional procedure for removing Obama from the office is the impeachment process.
The TRUTH is that this Congress would not impeach him if he beat Nancy Pelosi to death with a baseball bat and clearly they don't give a damn if he was born in Kenya or Cleveland.
Dear Dr. Truth, what’s the truth about his eligibility? If you want to give up on historical record and truth which may effect 2012 or just his legacy as a fraud do so, but you seriously need to unrant yourself. Let the rest of us fail and then we can acknowledge what a great seer your were.
They “felt” he was eligible! Well, isn’t that special.
This will go on until we all die or the truth comes out. Whichever comes first. Of course I am educating my grandson to pursue the truth, so who knows about the death deadline.
Then the TRUTH is that we no longer have a Constitution, we have a piece of paper that is no longer of any import.
I'm not ready to go there just yet, or ever for that matter. Something about an oath I once swore.
If you want to follow it, then get your congressman to start the impeachment process or pick a candidate for 2012 and start working for them.
If not, then file a bunch of these stupid lawsuits.
No one has proven he is NOT eligible. He is now the president, so even if someone were to prove it now, the only way to remove him from office is by impeachment.
What you guys are proposing is some kind of judicial coup where the courts make a ruling that he is ineligible and then.... well, you tell me, because I can't think of a legal remedy that the courts could impose. Can you?
There is nothing in the Constitution about disqualifying a person who has been sworn in as President and whose Electoral College votes were certified by the Vice President in his role as President of the Senate. If one Representative and one Senator had objected to the Certification of the vote of the Electoral College on January 8th, perhaps there would be Constitutional grounds but that didn’t happen.
Now impeachment is the only Constitutional option.
This is the suit I was searching for an attorney for from last week. It is filed.
We don't know whether he legally took that name. All we know is that his step father registered him under that name at a private school, assuming the document is authentic. There are a number of possible reasons why he might have gone by the name at the school, even though it was not his legal name. For example, it's possible he did it to avoid confusion at school, so that everyone knew the kid was from the Sotero household.
Even if he legally changed his name to Sotero in Indonesia(which I doubt), it still doesn't mean he was adopted. You don't need to be adopted to change your name.
I've known several kids growing up who unofficially went by their step father's last name, even though they were not legally adopted and never had their names legally changed.
It's even more likley for something like this to happen in a third world counrty where informal and extralegal arrangements are widespread and largely tolerated.
What possible relevance does it have to his eligibility?
So you'd be fine with some foreigner coming the US, say as an adult, possibly as an agent of his government, falsefying his identity, pretending to be a natural born citizen, and winning an election for President, or even some lessor office for which one must at least be a citizen. Then after all that was disovered continuing to exercise the powers that office?
I wouldn't.
For all we know that has already happened. I'm not fine with Obama being president. But he is. And the only constitutional provision for removing him from office is the impeachment process.
Do you think in such a case that a ruling by the Supreme Court that he was not "eligible" is going to accomplish anything? Who is going to enforce it? And on what Constitutional authority can the Supreme court remove him from office?
I wouldn't.
How far are you willing to go?
How about doing all of the above? Plus getting laws in place to require proof of eligibility for his and all offices.
But you see before there can be an impeachment, if one is even possible, there must be an investigation. The birth certificate must be subpoenaed and constitutional scholars consulted on the meaning, for purposes of eligibility to the Office of President, of the term "natural born citizen". You think the Democrats in Congress are going to allow that? I don't. Without their permission there would be no power to subpoena the birth certificate, or to get the scholars to testify to Congress. So that leaves the courts.
BTW, I'm not one is 100% certain that he not a natural born citizen. But I'm not 100% certain that he is. I think the American people deserve to know, one way or the other. After that, let the chips fall where they may.
Art. III, Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution.
But who says *they* would remove him from office? They would just declare that he was not eligible. Then, who knows. I'm sure it wouldn't be pretty, unless he "did the right thing" and stepped down, to face fraud charges at the very least. Maybe there would be a deal struck, where if he stepped down quietly, no such charges would be brought. Who knows? It would be Terra Inconita. Unprecedented.
Art. III, Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution.
But who says *they* would remove him from office? They would just declare that he was not eligible. Then, who knows. I'm sure it wouldn't be pretty, unless he "did the right thing" and stepped down, to face fraud charges at the very least. Maybe there would be a deal struck, where if he stepped down quietly, no such charges would be brought. Who knows? It would be Terra Incognita. Unprecedented.
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.