Posted on 10/15/2010 6:12:49 PM PDT by RobinMasters
A team of U.S. attorneys based in California has argued to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that there essentially is nothing the American public can do to determine if, in fact, Barack Obama is qualified under the U.S. Constitution's demand for a "natural born citizen" in the Oval Office, and if they are injured, at least they are all injured alike.
The arguments were presented in a brief submitted by U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. and his assistants Roger West and David DeJute in defense of a lawsuit that was brought by a long list of plaintiffs including a presidential candidate, members of the military, members of the state legislature and others against Obama.
The plaintiffs had asked the appeals court to reopen the arguments because the district court's ruling, left standing, would strip minorities in the United States of "all political power" and leave laws to be based "upon the whims of the majority."
That earlier brief was filed by Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, who is representing Wiley S. Drake, a vice presidential candidate on the 2008 ballot in California, and Markham Robinson, an elector from the state.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
This is a defacto admission that he is not qualified... something that we have all known for a long time.
LLS
9th Circuit Court? You don’t even have to venture a guess as to which way they’ll rule.
Kreep and company will have to take it to the Supreme Court.
I don’t buy it. Fraud and treason would seem punishable for those committing it against We The People. Politicians are not above the law! Nixon was run out of office for far less.
No, it says or implies nothing of the kind.
No one has standing. No one can demand proof he is a natural-born citizen. Heck, no one can even define what “natural-born citizen” is. Maybe Vladimir Putin will run for president here. He can’t be any worse than Obama. I’d trust him more.
U Sattorneys to ordinarycitizens: tough ship!
US attorneys to ordinary citizens: tough ship!
If that’s their best and strongest argument, it proves there’s a lot to the claim he ISN’T qualified to hold office.
I mean, THAT is what you LEAD WITH??? No no no.
They are basically just arguing that it isn't an issue for a court. This isn't news. Dozens of previous rulings have already said it.
The only remedy to remove a sitting President is impeachment.
They would be lying.
Congress could impeach him and remove him from office. He can’t veto that.
How does that make it okay?
Dirty, stinking Rat *astards, all.
Nuff said.
Some team of U.S. Attorneys had better read up on the Declaration of Independence. There is most definitely something We the People can do when an abusive rogue government oversteps its constitutional limits. The Tea is being dumped into the harbor as we speak, powder & ball sales are at an all time high, and the tar is boiling in the cauldrun.
Keep your powder dry.
Rebellion is brewing!!
Remember in November!!
There’s also the 4th clause of the 25th amendment, too
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2608075/posts?page=106
OK, if that is correct, at what point in the electoral process are the qualifications of each candidate tested? Shouldn't the courts make a ruling on that?
Do the qualifications in the Constitution have no teeth?
Frucking Grassholes... >=(
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.