See #187.
Posted on 09/04/2009 11:36:07 AM PDT by Sibre Fan
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY JUDGMENT, and INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: 10 U.S.C. §938 and Army Regulation 27-10
COUNT I: DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF DUE TO UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATUTES, ILLEGAL ORDERS, AND LACK OF ADMINISTRATIVE OR LEGAL REMEDY
COUNT II: INJUNCTION AGAINST RETALIATION FOR CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR STATUS
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT: EXECUTIVE ORDERS OF Jan. 21, 2009
COUNT IV: Declaratory Judgment & Permanent Injunction PLAINTIFF SEEKS A FIVE-PART DECLARATORTY JUDGMENT AS WELL AS A PERMANENT INJUNCTION TO PROTECT CONSCIENTIOUS DISOBEDIENCE TO UNLAWFUL ORDERS FROM RETALIATION
COUNT V: AN OFFICER’S RIGHT OR DUTY TO CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION TO AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRESIDENT?
COUNT VI: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT---5 U.S.C. §702, AND FEDERAL COMMON LAW apply to the PRESIDENT AS COMMANDER-in-CHIEF
COUNT VI: THE CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE PEOPLE; THE PATTERN OF RACKETEERING AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATION
COUNT VIII: CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS ACTIONABLE UNDER 42 U.S.C. §§1983, 1988(a)(a)
(Excerpt) Read more at archive.org ...
That last phrase applies to the militia of the several States, not the Army and Navy. But even if it did, they are *always* in the actual service of the United States.
I know that...I was typing a quick summary.
I figured you did. But it's a very important point. If BO was born in Hawaii, then under the 14th amendment he's a citizen. Or he could have been naturalized and he'd be a citizen. (IIRC his Indonesian half sister was naturalized). But that's not enough. He must be a natural born citizen. Like "well regulated militia", "natural born citizen" is a "term of art", having a meaning that is more than the sum of it's constituent words. Especially words in their more modern usage.
The last clause applies to both phrases, not just the militia.
The clause "actual service" indicates war or armed conflict, not just existing.
Followup. I have seen their COLB’s. Both say born in Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii along with the other info a COLB would have from the 70’s. They would NOT let me copy the info nor would they show me their ‘real’ birth certificates. So I guess I’m in the same ‘nutter’ boat with a few others and should have never brought it up. It is frustrating because both of these individuals have used their circumstances to justify 0bama’s circumstance since the election so I KNOW they are not lying. But they are both GOOD SEIU members..so I plead guilty.
If the President is not Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy when there is no war or armed conflict, then who is under the Constitution, and where does it indicate this?
"For reasons previously stated, Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order is denied and Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed in its entirety. Defandants shall recover their costs from Plaintiff. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 (d)."
It is so ordered this 16th Day of September, 2009."
/s Clay D. Land
U.S. District Judge
See 187
You’re surprised?
Not really, no. And deep down I suspect you're not all that surprised as well. The judge made it clear in the preliminary that there is a great deal of precedent for civilian court's reluctance to get between the military brass and it's people.
Well, it's back to California now.
An unsworn and unsigned statement purported to be by an Hawaiian official does not comply with Evidence Rule 1005, which is:
Rule 1005. Public Records
The contents of an official record, or of a document authorized to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed, including data compilations in any form, if otherwise admissible, may be proved by copy, certified as correct in accordance with rule 902 or testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If a copy which complies with the foregoing cannot be obtained by the exercise of reasonable diligence, then other evidence of the contents may be given.
Actually my prediction is that it won't get that far, and the case won't survive the motion to dismiss.
See #187.
From page 3 of the pdf file
Counsel makes these allegations although a “short-form” birth certificate has been made publicly available which indicates that the President was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. (footnote 3)
And here is foot note 3 on that page
“The Court observes that the President defeated seven opponents in a grueling campaign for his party’s nomination that lasted more than eighteen months and cost those opponents well over $300 million. See Federal Election Commission, Presidential Pre-Nomination Campaign
Disbursements Dec. 31, 2008,
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2009/20090608Pres/3_2008PresPrimaryCmpgnDis.pdf
(last visited Sept. 15, 2009).
Then the President faced a formidable opponent in the general election who received $84 million to conduct his general election campaign against the President. Press Release, Federal Election Commission, 2008 Presidential Campaign Financial Activity Summarized (June 8, 2009), available at
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2009/20090608PresStat.shtml.
It would appear that ample opportunity existed for discovery of evidence that would support any contention that the President was not eligible for the office he sought. Furthermore, Congress is apparently satisfied that the President is qualified to serve. Congress has not instituted impeachment proceedings, and in fact, the House of Representatives in a broad bipartisan manner has rejected the suggestion that the President is not eligible for office. See H.R. Res. 593, 111th Cong. (2009) (commemorating, by vote of 378-0, the 50th anniversary of Hawaii’s statehood and stating, “the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961”). “
You really believe that Orly is capable of thinking that far ahead?
|
From Judge Land's Order: “birther movement” “birther claim” “birther agenda”
Are you freakin' kidding me?!Shame on Judge Land for flagrantly displaying ALL of his pre-conceived notions in the courtroom and this order. Impeach and disbar this obtusely-bloviating and biased judge, who notoriously wears his personal opinion as he dons his robe. Judicial misconduct in the raw!
|
Yeah. nearly NINE YEARS AGO!!!!
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.
