Skip to comments.Donofrio - Judge Carter: “The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia..
Posted on 10/29/2009 5:25:46 PM PDT by rxsid
click here to read article
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.
Meanwhile, its 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 todays 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 Carters 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 Obamas eligibility in the DC District Court.
Is Leo pursuing this avenue of action?
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.
If the Republicans take control of the House in 2010 I wonder if they will have the balls to look into the 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.
Lets 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 didnt ask the age of the Speaker of the House, and just assumed that they were old enough per the Constitution. He just assumed and didnt 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 isnt the judicial branch. Because no crime has been committed, the President cant be impeached, so it isnt 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 wouldnt out themselves.
So I ask again, who would have legal authority?
I certainly dont get it.
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.
For me, in part, it will all depend on if enough true conservatives (& not more RINO's) get elected.
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.
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.
Let’s hope that the law is followed and justice is done.
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.
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.
May I post it with attribution on this thread I started?
Or would you like to do it yourself, and join the fun there?
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.
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.
Donofrio hasn’t done anything since his own case was shot down except criticize and bloviate.
Those are good and true points you made about Leo.
“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?
He hasn’t published any QW research? Or Chester Arther research? No Hawaiian statute research?
Please explain to me WHO would name a special prosecutor?
“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?
Okay, I’ll read this and maybe take heart again.
Thank you for the ping! So this means there’s still a chance!
Not my job.
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.
They would have the cojones if they are true constitutional conservatives and not rinos.
The writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President Obama holds office within that district.
Doesnt he hold office in ALL districts - and therefore cant 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.
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.
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.
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).
I believe Leo right now is working hard to pry the Hawaiian door open???
Rush squashed a caller today (yesterday) immediately after bringing up Jeremiah Write!!!
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.
Three years later, this might actually happen.
DC Plaintiff of “Petition for Review” is Montgomery Blair Sibley.
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.