Robertson's opinion was 'frivolous' and biased:
"We call the Courts attention to our recently filed Rule 28(j) letter. The fact is that by the appellee/defendants own public statements he is not qualified under the Constitution, and he knows it.
Next, at App. 208-209 the lower court judge then engages in what has become and will remain his most infamous indulgence in bias and the appearance of bias from an extrajudicial source. We refer to his statement, which has traveled far and wide and repeatedly on the Internet, that: The issue of the Presidents citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by Americas vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obamas two-year- campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court."
“Robertson’s opinion was ‘frivolous’ and biased:””We call the Courts attention to our recently filed Rule 28(j) letter. The fact is that by the appellee/defendants own public statements he is not qualified under the Constitution, and he knows it.
Next, at App. 208-209 the lower court judge then engages in what has become and will remain his most infamous indulgence in bias and the appearance of bias from an extrajudicial source. We refer to his statement, which has traveled far and wide and repeatedly on the Internet, that:
The issue of the Presidents citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by Americas vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obamas two-year- campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court.”