Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Defendants' Brief

Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al Advertorial in 20090706 Issue Wash Times

New publicity fund

1 posted on 07/09/2009 8:08:33 AM PDT by STARWISE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: STARWISE

What is this about?


2 posted on 07/09/2009 8:13:22 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

I assume this is involving the birth certificate?


3 posted on 07/09/2009 8:14:28 AM PDT by Humal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

This is going to be a long thread.


4 posted on 07/09/2009 8:15:50 AM PDT by taxtruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
I'm not a lawyer, but I would attack the presumed connection between procedure and standing. I would also argue that the absence of legal/legistlative recourse is not a valid excuse and permission slip for continued violation of the law. The courts should be made to understand that our system of checks and balances were established primarily for this reason... to prevent one or more branches of government from overreaching.

By placing procedure over compliance, the courts by law would be implicating itself in the continued violation of the law.

As citizens, we ALL have "standing", because we can all be affected by the defendant's violation of the law.

As for immunity, NOBODY is immune from our laws except those who are not citizens... and even then, there are limits.

Does a private citizen who witnesses a crime against another have the authority to execute a citizen's arrest if the victim is incapacitated as a result of the crime?

What are the "procedures" for a citizens arrest? Any? Or is it simply the authority for one person to detain another when a violation of the law is observed until the proper authorities can take charge?

Are there any examples in our constitution or laws that illustrate the premise that only those with legal standing are authorized to report/pursue the violation of a law?

The court should be made to understand that by ruling for the defendants, they will be setting a precedent that only those who are directly affected by a crime, or are in a position of authority to "PREVENT" the crime are allowed to report/pursue violations.

What would such a precedence do to crime prevention/prosecution efforts such as Crime Stoppers... or Neighborhood Watch programs... etc.????

When a potential violation of the law is brought to the attention of our executive and judicial authorities, they are first bound by law and oath to ensure that the violation of law itself is NOT OCCURRING or IS STOPPED.
Prosecution of the offender(s) is a separate matter!


13 posted on 07/09/2009 9:30:18 AM PDT by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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