Posted on 01/30/2009 10:38:28 AM PST by Sorry screen name in use
Today, Leo Donofrio posted an article in which he posits that the best way to achieve standing in challenging an ineligible President, in his view, is to gather as many active military personnel and file suit in federal court:
(Excerpt) Read more at therightsideoflife.com ...
lol.. no need to call me Sir.. Sandrat is the one that should get that honor.. if you look up, I started by asking him because I knew this was an issue before and he had the information straight from the UCMJ, Hatch Act, and others.
I salute you both, Sir!
The JAG would also have to tread very softly. If they used some general UCMJ law as blanket cover are they going to offer NJP? This is beyond NJP, and if they did go the NJP route, the suing service member would most likely refuse it. So that leaves court martial. Is the military going to start a case that says you cannot sue in civilian court a public office holder? I doubt it.
The former service member could turn around after his court martial trial and sue the military for violating his civil rights. And if at a later date Obama does turn out not to be a natural born citizen it would only strengthen the former service members case against the military.
JAG from what I see here would be better to leave this alone. Leave them worms in the can.
Interesting. Verrrrrry interesting. I believe that Orly Taitz is looking to this option as well.
See Reply#41.
I agree.
I regret my failure to communicate properly with the Officers and Gentlemen, here.
I sense that the obots know full well where they are most vulnerable legal attack and they know they have no effective defense.
Yes, Orly knows how to get the job done.
It’s understandable. The issue can get are dander up.
The Hatch Act, as I recall, covers overt public political activities while associating the protest of the federal employee with their job.
As an example, a service member in uniform protesting that is covered by the press. This may convey to the public that the military is also behind the protester(s).
I have to see where it says that specifically that service members cannot sue individual government office holders in civilian court.
I only mentioned that because it differentiated when this came up during the election because of something about attempting to influence the outcome of an election was prohibited in the Hatch Act. That’s why I checked this time because the circumstances are different.
The only thing I’ve found so far that might be related is the Department of Defense Directive 1344.10 entitled “Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces”
http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134410p.pdf
Basically, not using the uniform to influence politics or elections. I don’t think this applies, as long as the scope is limited to eligibility.
And the Hatch Act does not apply to active duty military, correct?
I’d appreciate any JAG input, a ping, or link if anyone comes across something.
Ping, found something interesting just for reference, something related did come up with the Office of Special Council.
http://www.osc.gov/documents/hatchact/federal/Obama%20email.pdf
If you don’t have access behind the OCS.gov firewall, let me know and I’ll copy the text.
Can’t even forward emails you didn’t even write yourself, while at work. I wonder if that was ever an issue before this election.
I think it just shows that it hit the radar of the OSC.. now, that was during the actual election in which the Hatch act applied, so I doubt it has relevance here other than it did come up.
Most interesting.
The Hatch Act does apply to the military and there are DoD Directives that make it even more stringent on DoD Civilian Employees, Military personnel, as well as Government Contractors.
Driving on post I may have A Bummper Sticker of the candidate of my choice on the rear bumer of my vehicle but nothing else and the can say nothing dispariging about other candidates. This includes even local elections.
Yeah, a bunch of people probably complained, so they had to put a lid on it.
I don’t think it’s relevant now, either, but it probably wouldn’t hurt to have a broadly representative group of soldiers, democrat and republican. I’m sure Obamas’ lawyers would try to use any angle they can, Hatch Act or otherwise...
I see now, thanks. I found these links that help some:
Hatch Act ‘Dos and Don’ts’: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=45542
which links back to OSC Hatch Act for Federal Employees: http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm
man, your not whisling dixie with this statement.
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.