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

Skip to comments.

Donofrio - Judge Carter: “The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia..
naturalborncitizen ^ | 10/29/2009 | rxsid

Posted on 10/29/2009 5:25:46 PM PDT by rxsid

Judge Carter: “The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district.”

I was impressed with the integrity of Judge Carter’s ruling today. It gives me hope that the POTUS eligibility issue will eventually have its day in court on the merits.

POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE.

Congress is the branch the Constitution empowers to remove a sitting President. The power to judicially enforce any review of POTUS eligibility is a pre-requisite to judicial involvement as the federal courts do not have the power to issue simple advisory opinions. A declaratory judgment is more than an advisory opinion. This is because a declaratory judgment must have the power of enforcement attached whereas an advisory opinion does not.

The declaratory judgment requests of plaintiffs in the Barnett case had to be dismissed because the court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. It’s really that simple. Judge Carter’s analysis of this issue was perfect.

QUO WARRANTO

Because a quo warranto is the only proper action to review the eligibility of a sitting President – and because such an action requires a trial of facts - Congress empowered the DC District Court to hold such a trial (by jury if requested by either party) when the eligibility of the President (or any US national office holder) is called into question.

There is no political question doctrine defense available to a sitting President for a quo warranto brought in the DC District Court. This is because Congress properly exercised its Constitutional authority to review a President’s eligibility via the quo warranto statute which also provides for the removal of an ineligible person from that office if necessary.

The US Attorney General and the US attorney have been empowered by Congress to institute a quo warranto on their own volition. Furthermore, any person may request that these officers do the same. If consent is not given by the DOJ, section 3503 of the quo warranto statute allows an “interested person” to petition the DC District Court on its own. The Barnett plaintiffs failed to avail themselves of this option.

Additionally, the Department of Justice has created a genuine conflict of interest as to 3502 requests by any “third person” (meaning any citizen). By defending the President in this eligibility litigation involving quo warranto, it isn’t possible for the Department of Justice to remain impartial.

Therefore, either a special prosecutor must be named for purposes of allowing the Congressional intent of the quo warranto statute to be realized, or the DC District Court may waive the requirement and examine any verified petition on its own consent.

The conflict will eventually be tested in the DC District Court.

Meanwhile, it’s important for me to point out that everything I have told readers of this blog about quo warranto was confirmed by Judge Carter today.

JUDGE CARTER DID NOT HOLD THAT QUO WARRANTO WAS IMPROPER TO CHALLENGE THE ELIGIBILITY OF A SITTING PRESIDENT.

This was the most extraordinary part of today’s ruling. It opens the door wide for a proper eligibility challenge in the DC District Court where the hurdle for standing is different from ordinary federal cases.

Please take note that the Department of Justice attorneys argued before Judge Carter that quo warranto – even if brought properly in the DC District Court – could not be used to challenge the eligibility of a sitting President. Judge Carter’s ruling did not support the Department of Justice position.

The ruling today affirms that the proper venue for challenging the eligibility of a sitting President is the DC District Court.

This is a very encouraging ruling for those contemplating a quo warranto challenge to President Obama’s eligibility in the DC District Court.

THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT ERROR

The only part of today’s ruling I take issue with is footnote 3 on page 22 where Judge Carter assumes that since Congress has the Constitutional authority to enact legislation regarding naturalization and citizenship by statute that they also have the power to define the meaning of “natural born citizen”.

But Congress has not defined “natural born citizen” while they have defined “naturalized citizen” and “citizen by statute”. Since neither the Congress nor the courts have defined “natural born citizen”, we are left without a legal working definition.

Faced with a sitting President who admits to having been a British citizen at birth, the need for a quo warranto to be instituted is of the utmost importance to the future of this nation.

Here is Judge Carter’s correct ruling on the quo warranto issue:

C. Quo Warranto Claims…

The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district. The quo warranto provision codified in the District of Columbia Code provides, “A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military.” D.C. Code §§ 16-3501 – 16-3503. Should a person other than the Attorney General of the United States or the United States Attorney wish to bring a quo warranto claim, that person must receive leave of court to do so. Id. at § 16-3502. This leave of court must be granted, according to the text of the statute, by the District Court for the District of Columbia.

Nothing in this rule appears to question the power of the DC District Court to issue a writ of quo warranto to President Obama which would require him to prove his eligibility to hold the office of President. I must comment Judge Carter for his exercise of judicial restraint on this issue."

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/10/29/judge-carter-the-writ-of-quo-warranto-must-be-brought-within-the-district-of-columbia-because-president-obama-holds-office-within-that-district/


TOPICS: Government; History; Military/Veterans; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: barnett; carter; certifigate; donofrio; obama

1 posted on 10/29/2009 5:25:46 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LucyT; BP2; STARWISE; Red Steel; pissant; hoosiermama; null and void; Amityschild; Calpernia; ...
Ping to Donofrio's take on today's ruling (re: Carter court).
2 posted on 10/29/2009 5:26:40 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid; rocco55; thouworm; GOPJ; Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; george76; PhilDragoo; ...
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Donofrio's take on today's ruling (re: Carter court).

.

3 posted on 10/29/2009 5:28:51 PM PDT by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Leo mentioned on his site before this that he would not be posting to his blog but taking legal action. Leo has a lot of heart and is fighting the fight along with Miss Trickly and others.


4 posted on 10/29/2009 5:32:19 PM PDT by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; BP2; STARWISE; Red Steel; pissant; hoosiermama; null and void; Amityschild; Calpernia
In particular, this part...

Meanwhile, it’s important for me to point out that everything I have told readers of this blog about quo warranto was confirmed by Judge Carter today.

JUDGE CARTER DID NOT HOLD THAT QUO WARRANTO WAS IMPROPER TO CHALLENGE THE ELIGIBILITY OF A SITTING PRESIDENT.

This was the most extraordinary part of today’s ruling. It opens the door wide for a proper eligibility challenge in the DC District Court where the hurdle for standing is different from ordinary federal cases.

Please take note that the Department of Justice attorneys argued before Judge Carter that quo warranto – even if brought properly in the DC District Court – could not be used to challenge the eligibility of a sitting President. Judge Carter’s ruling did not support the Department of Justice position.

The ruling today affirms that the proper venue for challenging the eligibility of a sitting President is the DC District Court.

This is a very encouraging ruling for those contemplating a quo warranto challenge to President Obama’s eligibility in the DC District Court.


5 posted on 10/29/2009 5:33:58 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

~~PING!


6 posted on 10/29/2009 5:34:06 PM PDT by STARWISE (The Art & Science Institute of Chicago Politics NE Div: now open at the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rxsid
This is a very encouraging ruling for those contemplating a quo warranto challenge to President Obama’s eligibility in the DC District Court.

Is Leo pursuing this avenue of action?

7 posted on 10/29/2009 5:38:10 PM PDT by newfreep ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." - P.J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Other than being a world-class poker player, Donofrio is one smart legal beagle. I think they’re intimately related vocations.

The question in my mind is, will he get the thing in the proper court with the proper argument. Too many jurists are running scared from this issue.

Carter, too, is a smart jurist.


8 posted on 10/29/2009 5:39:06 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (FreepMail me if you want on the Bourbon ping list!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

If the Republicans take control of the House in 2010 I wonder if they will have the balls to look into the issue?


9 posted on 10/29/2009 5:40:26 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
Yeah, it seems as though he may be busy working another lawsuit(s) ultimately aimed at this eligibility issue.

His latest posting may be a kind of "I told you so" (that the case before judge Carter wouldn't go forward), but with his reiteration that the QW in the DC courts is really the only way forward.

10 posted on 10/29/2009 5:41:06 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Let’s play a hypothetical. Play along with me on this one.

A President and Vice President are killed. In haste, the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court swears in the Speaker of the House as President.

After the swearing in, it is learned that the Chief Justice didn’t ask the age of the Speaker of the House, and just assumed that they were old enough per the Constitution. He just assumed and didn’t know that the new President was NOT qualified due to age.

Now the newly sworn in President CLAIMS that they are old enough, but refuses to release their birth certificate to the public.

Just who has legal authority for review after the Speaker of the House has been sworn in as President? According to this ruling, it isn’t the judicial branch. Because no crime has been committed, the President can’t be impeached, so it isn’t the legislative branch (and because the Speaker of the House is from the majority party, that party controls the House as well). The President is chief executive over the executive branch so they wouldn’t out themselves.

So I ask again, who would have legal authority?

I certainly don’t get it.


11 posted on 10/29/2009 5:41:43 PM PDT by CJacobs (From the Ozark / Clarksville area)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newfreep
This is a very encouraging ruling for those contemplating a quo warranto challenge to President Obama’s eligibility in the DC District Court.

Is Leo pursuing this avenue of action?

-----------------------------------------------------------

Good question. My assumption (based on some of his posts) is that he's either actively working on another (eligibility) lawsuit(s) or is researching the viability of some potential ones.

12 posted on 10/29/2009 5:43:19 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer
"If the Republicans take control of the House in 2010 I wonder if they will have the balls to look into the issue?"

For me, in part, it will all depend on if enough true conservatives (& not more RINO's) get elected.

13 posted on 10/29/2009 5:45:18 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

The only problem I have with this is that the District of Columbia may be the most corrupt and the most leftist jurisdiction of any in the country. So what are the odds?

I say more power to all of them, for pursuing this in any way possible. This strikes me as being a hard fight to win. But the more we can keep it alive, the better.


14 posted on 10/29/2009 5:46:06 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Rush does a lot of “I told you so’s” too. The only good news was he mentioned that the judge said that is the right place and hopefully Leo is working on a case with some people.

He has been coming out with some of the best research with Miss Trickly and some research volunteers Leo appears to be working with.


15 posted on 10/29/2009 5:47:15 PM PDT by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Let’s hope that the law is followed and justice is done.


16 posted on 10/29/2009 5:49:27 PM PDT by cvq3842 (A fool and his liberty are soon parted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sneakers

Ping


17 posted on 10/29/2009 5:49:42 PM PDT by A. Morgan (The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. Lawrence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

For him to have a case heard he has to get a prosecutor to agree to take the case and then a judge to decide to hear the case. What do you really think the chances of that are?

We have yet to see Leo actually do anything except talk after his supreme court appeal was turned down. Much of his talk involved taking pot shots at all the lawyers actually working to get the case before a judge over the past 9 months rather than him moving forward with his own case.

I’ll be so thankful if he is actually successful in his selected course of action, but I am not holding my breath on this one. I will be thankful if he even takes action in an attempt to have his case heard. That will be progress of his slam book blogging and inactive pontificating.


18 posted on 10/29/2009 5:52:23 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CJacobs
Excellent analogy!

I don't get it either. They all seem to be pointing at the other "guy" saying, it's not my job...it's theirs!

I've posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating, IMO:

From Judge Carter's ORDER:

"The Court must establish that it has jurisdiction before it may reach the question of interpreting the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution."
This statement is found in the SCOTUS brief overview:

"Jurisdiction. According to the Constitution (Art. III, §2): “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution"
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/briefoverview.pdf

Apparently, "we" are all supposed to believe the party line that a question specific to Article II, Section 1 Clause 5 in the CONSTITUTION itself (& not some election law, or state law, or statue, etc) is something the "judicial" branch can not address. Carter and all the other judges that ruled the judiciary doesn't have jurisdiction is, IN PLAIN SITE, contradicting the Constitution.

19 posted on 10/29/2009 5:53:51 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CJacobs
me likey.

May I post it with attribution on this thread I started?

Or would you like to do it yourself, and join the fun there?

20 posted on 10/29/2009 5:54:32 PM PDT by ExGeeEye (Keep your powder dry, and your iron hidden.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

Leo supposedly is also a very good chess player. He said he has recently played in some tournaments and won one. I think he said he had draws with guys that have a 2200 to 2300 rating. The highest USCF rating ever was Bobby Fischer who was at 2810. His FIDE rating was 2785.

I think the guys Leo got draws from were just below grandmasters.


21 posted on 10/29/2009 5:55:03 PM PDT by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson; Frantzie
Could it be that he's waiting for a more "perfect" (if there is such a thing) case, if you will?

He strikes me as the exact opposite type of lawyer that Dr. Taitz is. That is, that he's not willing to put numerous unsound and piece meal type lawsuits together (as they've been described by many) and hope that one sticks. He seems to be the kind of attorney that will represent another in the near future, but one that has a better chance of succeeding based on all lesson's learned to date. And yes, much of his "pontificating" has been very educational (ex. Chester Arthur research, QW research, etc) to the country. Anyway, that's my take on the difference.

22 posted on 10/29/2009 6:02:10 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rxsid; All

Donofrio hasn’t done anything since his own case was shot down except criticize and bloviate.


23 posted on 10/29/2009 6:13:22 PM PDT by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Those are good and true points you made about Leo.


24 posted on 10/29/2009 6:15:04 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

“Judge Carter: “The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district.”

Excuse me for being obtuse. The Feds claim authority over everyone and everything in the U.S. but the Judge says Obama holds office in DC?


25 posted on 10/29/2009 6:16:12 PM PDT by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

He hasn’t published any QW research? Or Chester Arther research? No Hawaiian statute research?


26 posted on 10/29/2009 6:19:57 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dljordan
Because the POTUS does "business" from within DC. It's where the federal government is located. They have the jurisdiction.
27 posted on 10/29/2009 6:26:30 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: rxsid
Therefore, either a special prosecutor must be named for purposes of allowing the Congressional intent of the quo warranto statute to be realized, or the DC District Court may waive the requirement and examine any verified petition on its own consent.

Please explain to me WHO would name a special prosecutor?

28 posted on 10/29/2009 6:36:24 PM PDT by azishot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

“The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district.”

Doesn’t he hold office in ALL districts - and therefore can’t the writ be brought in ANY district?


29 posted on 10/29/2009 6:42:04 PM PDT by Castigar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucyT

Okay, I’ll read this and maybe take heart again.


30 posted on 10/29/2009 6:43:28 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: A. Morgan

Thank you for the ping! So this means there’s still a chance!


31 posted on 10/29/2009 6:54:05 PM PDT by sneakers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sneakers

bump


32 posted on 10/29/2009 7:24:13 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Thank You.


33 posted on 10/30/2009 4:20:07 AM PDT by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CJacobs

Not my job.

34 posted on 10/30/2009 4:25:45 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar (A mob of one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; rxsid

They need (someone needs) to bring it on, get’r’done.. Am so sick of the bs. Keyes needs a strong attorney pronto. Hit ‘em hard and fast and let no one see what’s coming.


35 posted on 10/30/2009 5:32:10 AM PDT by Freedom2specul8 (I am Jim Thompson............................Please pray for our troops....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer

They would have the cojones if they are true constitutional conservatives and not rinos.


36 posted on 10/30/2009 5:35:17 AM PDT by Freedom2specul8 (I am Jim Thompson............................Please pray for our troops....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~; rocco55; thouworm; rxsid; GOPJ; Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; george76; ...
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

.

37 posted on 10/30/2009 8:02:59 AM PDT by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Castigar

“The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district.”

Doesn’t he hold office in ALL districts - and therefore can’t the writ be brought in ANY district?
********************************************************
No, Congress has the Constitutional power, and Congress delegated this power (by way of the quo warranto statute) to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.


38 posted on 10/30/2009 11:52:11 AM PDT by ConjunctionJunction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rxsid; All

Personally, I have NEVER wanted a court to remove POTUS Obama from office. However, I have wanted one to rule that he did not meet the NBC criteria so it would go to the SCOTUS to make a definitive ruling. Then if they ruled him unqualified Congress would have to remove him via the impeachment process or set a very bad precident.


39 posted on 10/30/2009 3:25:52 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas; All

Spot on (almost). Lower court to find him ineligible. Ruling confirmed by SCOTUS. Removed from office (taken into custody) by way of federal marshal’s or the FBI since Impeachment is reserved for a POTUS and not an usurper.


40 posted on 10/30/2009 3:32:47 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson

In one of his earlier posts he said he was starting litigation in Hawaii. Cover- up going down. He Has been getting shafted by the state on info on Obumbler and they have not been following the law(like the law means anything to these people).

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/hawaii-attorney-general-invokes-attorney-client-privilege-concerning-doh-natural-born-citizen-press-release-of-july-27-2009/


41 posted on 10/30/2009 5:34:25 PM PDT by luv2ndamend (May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. — Samue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

I believe Leo right now is working hard to pry the Hawaiian door open???


42 posted on 10/30/2009 9:58:27 PM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Rush squashed a caller today (yesterday) immediately after bringing up Jeremiah Write!!!


43 posted on 10/30/2009 10:01:16 PM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend

In his final post he did not mention litigating in Hawaii. He said he MIGHT pursue the case of NBC in the District of Columbia.


44 posted on 10/31/2009 1:43:35 AM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Three years later, this might actually happen.

DC Plaintiff of “Petition for Review” is Montgomery Blair Sibley.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2964583/posts


45 posted on 11/30/2012 6:56:45 PM PST by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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