Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: edge919

I notice you like to quote Judge Lamberth in his dismissal of Orly Taitz, when he writes, “This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.” Can you tell us what specific legal principle this is referencing??


Two legal principles are referenced: (1) What is a quo warranto common law writ and who is eligible to file a quo warranto claim in the District of Columbia under the DC Code and (2) the principle of “Standing”.

Following the statement mentioned above, Judge Lamberth goes through a detailed explanation of the requirements for standing.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30040084/TAITZ-v-OBAMA-QW-23-MEMORANDUM-OPINION-dcd-04502943496-23-0


2,788 posted on 10/29/2010 10:08:50 AM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2784 | View Replies ]


To: jamese777

I didn’t ask you about the rest of The Court’s decision, but about his specific statement you quoted. If you want to quote actual legal principles from the decision, that makes sense, but what you quoted about tilting at windmills makes the judge look like he’s biased and partial, or maybe just an idiot. Is that what you intended??


2,789 posted on 10/29/2010 10:16:21 AM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2788 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson