..And all this time I thought it was because Sotomayor needed a girlfriend.. Or maybe Janet Napolitano.
So the Supreme Court is in on the conspiracy?
Crap! I was in the middle of posting this & you beat me to it! LOL!!! Good for you! Thanks for sharing this juicy piece of info.
Wow! We need some more investigation into THIS...
Is 'twitlonger' thus the ultimate in insignificance?
ok, i went to the site...pulled up obama under dockets and only 2 out of 21 cases named kagen....am i looking at the right info....this story says all the cases she was the solicitor general....
Despicable, but I am not surprised.
See min 2:50 & 4:50 in this vid, from the Pittsburgh 2009 G20 meeting. Irrespective of anything Icke says, just look at them. This was not on our TV news, nor will it be.:
“David Icke-Message for the uniforms and dark suits”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNoduSUwN8Y&feature=player_embedded
(Audio) “Gerald Celente on Dr. Bill Deagle Nutrimedical report” 20 July 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afPqRLYecnY
so this means if any birth case does come before the supreme court she would have to recuse herself, leaving the conservative court members in a clear majority, right? so why is this a good thing for obama?
No Obama ineligibility appeal has been reviewed before the Supreme Court because the Supreme Court has denied all eight attempts. The official legalese is “Denied the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari.” In normal English that means “no thanks, we’re not interested.”
The Supreme Court operates under a tradition known as “the rule of four.” It takes four of the nine justices to agree in order to “grant cert” which means to Grant a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and hear an appeal before the full court. In a typical year about 95% of appeals are denied and about 5% are granted “Cert” for judicial review before the full Court.
The eight denied Obama ineligibility/natural born citizen appeals are: Berg v Obama, Beverly v FEC, Craig v US, Donofrio v Wells, Herbert v Obama, Lightfoot v Bowen, Schneller v Cortes, and Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz.
As Solicitor General, Kagan’s name should appear on all federal government appeals at the Supreme Court. But as you can see, only two of the eight appeals actually named Barack Hussein Obama as a defendant.
Nothing to see hear, please move along.
Does this mean that she will have to recuse herself if this issue ever gets to the Supremes?
Save the information before it gets scrubbed from the net.
ping
Wow. Interesting.
My theory was that they knew she was an advocate of Legal Positivism and would be able to counter Scalia on a personal basis.
But I do like yours.
“Well, someone figured out why Obama nominated Elana Kagan for the Supreme Court.... Pull up the Supreme Courts website, go to the docket and search for Obama. She was the Solicitor General for all the suits against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural born citizenship. He owes her big time.”
gnip
Its smoke and mirrors time right now, how convenient that Wikileaks decided to take front stage right now.
This is a situation that has the obots in a mad frenzy to squelch this news I am beginning to see.
This is a viable viral target, this will keep Kagan from being appointed.
makes me wonder if she’ll recuse herself from cases she was involved with,like the other justices
Btt