Posted on 12/15/2008 8:10:50 AM PST by STARWISE
The Supreme Court orders denied Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz application for staying the election as well as requesting that the Court would grant an injunction disallowing the Electoral College to hold its vote today until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be finally determined:
________________________
08A469
WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE
The application for stay and/or injunction addressed
to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied.
________________________
CitizenWells’ letter to the Electoral College
http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/14/citizen-wells-letter-to-electors-electoral-college-uphold-us-constitution-december-15-2008-electors-vote-obama-is-not-eligible-demand-proof-2008-election-election-laws-political-party-pledges/
presents the next potential opportunity along the process of attempting to inform the nation about Barack Obama’s seeming ineligibility to serve in the office of the President.
Also, I have my thoughts on the next steps in this process.
A current listing of eligibility lawsuits can be found here.
State-based initiatives for electoral reform can be found here.
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?page_id=1909
Naturally, this posting will be updated as circumstances warrant.
Update: CitizenWells isn’t happy about this decision at all. Read up on what he’s doing about it.
http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/wrotnowski-v-bysiewicz-us-supreme-court-december-15-2008-justices-decide-cort-wrotnowski-versus-connecticut-secretary-of-state-bysiewicz-writ-of-mandamus-obama-not-eligible-stay-denied/
Update: InvestigatingObama’s question may be “asked and answered:” Is the Judicial Review Allowed Only After the Electoral College Vote?
http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/2008/12/is-judicial-review-allowed-only-after.html
The Supreme Court orders denied Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz application for staying the election as well as requesting that the Court would grant an injunction disallowing the Electoral College to hold its vote today until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be finally determined:
________________________
08A469
WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE
The application for stay and/or injunction addressed
to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied.
________________________
CitizenWells’ letter to the Electoral College
presents the next potential opportunity along the process of attempting to inform the nation about Barack Obama’s seeming ineligibility to serve in the office of the President.
Also, I have my thoughts on the next steps in this process.
A current listing of eligibility lawsuits can be found here.
State-based initiatives for electoral reform can be found here.
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?page_id=1909
Naturally, this posting will be updated as circumstances warrant.
Update: CitizenWells isn’t happy about this decision at all. Read up on what he’s doing about it.
Update: InvestigatingObama’s question may be “asked and answered:” Is the Judicial Review Allowed Only After the Electoral College Vote?
http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/2008/12/is-judicial-review-allowed-only-after.html
So, Donofrio was right. His numerous replies to comments here .. scroll down:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
ORDERS IN PENDING CASES
08A469
WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE
The application for stay and/or injunction addressed
to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/courtorders/121508zor.pdf
ping
Thanks for the freepmails and pings.
I’m speechless.
The SC has denied stays on EC voting. Does the EC have to vote before the SC can act?
Hard to tell if you’ve been pinged yet. For your various CertifiGate ping lists.
Isn’t this a significant enough case to demand an explanation of why it is being denied?
So whats next... Keyes doesn’t come up until March 13th....
Not good news. The EC votes today, & then it goes to Congress...
Here is a link to a credible rebuke of the “Polarik” analysis of BHO COLB. I’d like to see what FReepers think. Where is Polarik?
I don’t think they have to explain their decisions.
I still say we could have used a lot of help from talk radio that we did not get.
I don't get it why is this not breaking news?
In 1857 the Court ruled that an African Black was less than a full human, and so gave them lower standing in law. In 2008 the Court gives all but the elite and the faddishly political access -- no hearing for a poor woman being murdered by her husband and a blind judge from a State where planned death is a major industry, and no hearing for us citizens who would attempt to question our Lordships' choices to rule over us.
Today we all are like the African Negros of that loathsome ruling -- Dred Scotts, we each -- who have had our rights and citizenship stolen from us!
We are obviously missing half the story.
We now have a candidate who will probably be placed in office and the country knows little or nothing about him. Why is this? How can this even be?
I think so.
The Constitution does not address candidacy nuances prior to the actual EC vote (it’s all state issues prior), and federally Congress is not officially/formally notified of those candidates until the EC vote. The cases considered by SCOTUS so far demand delaying the EC vote so the state issues can be resolved - a grave act not to be done upone mere allegations of disqualification. Put coarsely: the Electoral College vote will not be delayed just because some state _might_ be stupid. There just isn’t enough evidence to mess with Congress’ edict that the EC shall vote on December 15th.
Even after the EC vote, I’m not sure SCOTUS can act until January 8. Examining the 12th Amendment, I see the votes are delivered _sealed_ to Congress - officially, nobody knows the votes until Dick Cheney himeself opens the envelopes, counts the votes, and declares a winner. Anyone bringing a challenge over the EC vote does not have standing to even know, officially, the outcome of that vote until then.
AFAIK, only the electors have standing to challenge O’s qualification, and that only between November 4 and December 15 (too late now). From December 15 to January 8, nobody has standing because officially nobody knows who won. On January 8, the first person to have standing is Dick Cheney (i.e.: current VP), who is the person who actually tallies the votes and would be in a position to question an Elector’s vote. Once the President Of The Senate (the current VP, Cheney) declares the winner (I anticipate O getting a majority vote, so other complications won’t happen), only then might the people at large have standing to challenge O’s qualifications.
So, upshot of my revised $0.02 opinion: the Supreme Court can, at this point (Dec 15, EC vote day), only take a case after January 8 as official federal notice of the outcome of the EC vote is only taken then.
Forgot the link on Polarik:
http://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?serendipity%5Baction%5D=search&serendipity%5BsearchTerm%5D=polarik
Nope, it’s not. SCOTUS won’t delay the federal EC vote based on mere allegations of disqualification at the state level.
The nuances of this issue are very important. A vague “we don’t think he’s qualified, show us the original BC” isn’t good enough. The cases SCOTUS is denying aren’t even about the BC, they’re about O’s father’s citizenship.
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.