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

Skip to comments.

Stunner! Supremes to give eligibility case another look
wnd.com ^ | 02/17/2011 | Bob Unruh

Posted on 02/17/2011 1:04:49 PM PST by rxsid

"Stunner! Supremes to give eligibility case another look
Challenge to Obama getting 2nd conference before court

In a stunning move, the U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled another "conference" on a legal challenge to Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office, but officials there are not answering questions about whether two justices given their jobs by Obama will participate.

The court has confirmed that it has distributed a petition for rehearing in the case brought by attorney John Hemenway on behalf of retired Col. Gregory Hollister and it will be the subject of a conference on March 4.

It was in January that the court denied, without comment, a request for a hearing on the arguments. But the attorney at the time had submitted a motion for Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who were given their jobs by Obama, to recuse.

Should Obama ultimately be shown to have been ineligible for the office, his actions, including his appointments, at least would be open to challenge and question.

At the time, the Supreme Court acknowledged the "motion for recusal" but it changed it on official docketing pages to a "request." And it reportedly failed to respond to the motion.

..."

From: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=264897

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: certifigate; hollister; naturalborncitizen; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-258 next last
To: Lurking Libertarian

Don’t just google de facto officer doctrine, read it read the case law on it and you will find it does not apply.


41 posted on 02/17/2011 1:32:03 PM PST by rolling_stone ( *this makes Watergate look like a kiddie pool*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: null and void

You are correct if OholyO’s two backscratchers recuse themselves.


42 posted on 02/17/2011 1:33:34 PM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: rolling_stone
Whatever happens cant be worse than the way it is now. We might have riots but thats better than a violent revolution.

Just another opportunity for looting.
43 posted on 02/17/2011 1:34:58 PM PST by crosshairs (The word for actor in Greek is hypocrite (its true).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Sotomayor and Kagan better recuse themselves.Are they even legally Justices if Obama is not eligible?


44 posted on 02/17/2011 1:35:51 PM PST by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

Bah. Half the US could die because of this wannabe Hitler, without anyone in power lifting a finger.

Remember what they said about Bill Clinton being able to rape a woman on the house floor without anyone intervening? Democrats and RINOS haven’t changed.


45 posted on 02/17/2011 1:36:57 PM PST by Hardraade (I want gigaton warheads now!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: biggredd1
So far, have only been able to get 3 votes. This is big because there is a request for the two dufus broads appt by dunham to recuse themselves. If that happens you would then need 3 votes to proceed to a hearing!!!!

Doubly wrong:

(1) There have never been any votes to hear any eligibility case. All have been denied without comment and without dissent and, most tellingly, without any call for a response from the Government. (When a party asks the Supreme Court to review a case, the opposing party doesn't have to respond; if any of the 9 justices are possibly interested in hearing a case, the court will "call for a response." Obama and the DOJ have never responded to any cert petition in any of the eligibility cases, and the Court has never asked for a response.)

(2) Even if 2 justices are recused, it still takes 4 votes to grant cert.

46 posted on 02/17/2011 1:37:06 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter; bushpilot1
Looks like the Montana bill will not happen this year either...

"the House State Administration Committee had tabled the bill earlier that day. The vote was 9-9, with three Republicans joining six Democrats in opposing the bill. "

Surprised? It does in fact look like there are many that are fearful of ridicule from the state run media.

Requiring documentation and proof of eligibility for office are clearly not a bad thing...unless of course your trying to subvert the requirements.

Hat tip to BP1 for the article.

47 posted on 02/17/2011 1:37:17 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

My thoughts as well. The closest I have come to hearing any MSM is Matthews MAYBE calling him Barry.

The print and TV MSM have been using a broad brush this week to AGAIN paint all BIRTHERS as crazy and removed from the GOP blah blah blah.

The mere fact that this Is *still* being discussed after two years is telling.

The Gov. of Hawaii’s mess he caused in saying he saw ‘a notation’ is telling.

The fact that there are more than one archives of Obama bragging about being Kenyan born in his early political days to make himself look more BLACK than Keyes and others is telling.

Why no college records? Was was someone killed surrounding passportgate? Why no disclosure of his alias?

The more they say folks are crazy the more they have to hide.

Why not just release all records instead of calling people crazy?

IMPROPER DISCLOSURE OF BARRY SOETORO OBAMA (whatever his real name is) And the media is ALL I VIEW AS CRAZY!


48 posted on 02/17/2011 1:37:17 PM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Obama:If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun (the REAL Arizona instigator))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

If BO is found to be inelligle, then the job would revert to Biden. He was born here and to two American citizen parents. Biden is actually qualified. But that’s ok, I don’t think he could find his way into work everyday.


49 posted on 02/17/2011 1:37:29 PM PST by Texas resident (Hunkered Down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

“..one big idiot in charge..”

Sounds like the best Biden’s crew could come up with for a campaign slogan.


50 posted on 02/17/2011 1:39:18 PM PST by Rinnwald
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
For the record, I had an overwhelming suspicion AZ would fold on the Eligibility issue, and they did.

I held a small, glimmer of hope that it would at least get out of the senate judiciary committee. Maybe another state will push for it.

51 posted on 02/17/2011 1:39:46 PM PST by azishot (Everyone is entitled to my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Probably not-- Google "de facto officer doctrine."

Yes. People like to get all amped up and dramatic about "what would happen" if it was determined that Obama did not meet the eligibility requirements. It is a political question, and the consequences would be determined through political processes.

He most certainly would be impeached; however, there would be no guarantee of removal.

I think this is a disappointing answer to many people, but it's the truth. The Court cannot order the POTUS to resign, nor can they declare him impotent to execute the powers of the office.

This is not to say that such revelations would not cause a constitutional crisis of the highest order. There would likely be a practical stripping of powers, with lower officials and military officers refusing to act on presidential orders.

I think the most likely result of concrete revelations of ineligibility would result in impeachment and removal within days, and an introduction to your new president: Mr. Joseph Biden.

52 posted on 02/17/2011 1:40:38 PM PST by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: chris_bdba

Sotomayor and Kagan better recuse themselves.Are they even legally Justices if Obama is not eligible?


Sotomayor and Kagan are irrelevant to hearing Hollister before the full Court, as are Bader-Ginsberg and Breyer.
It only takes four of the nine Justices to agree to hear a case before the full Court and that leaves Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas to decide to hear this appeal.
The Justices appointed by Republican Presidents can make the decision.


53 posted on 02/17/2011 1:41:20 PM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
I think you are right. Read the fine print from the article:

It was in January that the court denied, without comment, a request for a hearing on the arguments. But the attorney at the time had submitted a motion for Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who were given their jobs by Obama, to recuse.

...

At the time, the Supreme Court acknowledged the "motion for recusal" but it changed it on official docketing pages to a "request." And it reportedly failed to respond to the motion.

I think the Court's failure to respond was an error on the Court's part and that is the reason for the rehearing. It will end up in the circular file along with all the rest. The Supremes are not going to address the eligibility issue unless forced to by lower court rulings. And since it appears that nobody or no organization actually has standing to sue then then I don't see this yielding any positive results either.

What a sad state we have come to in this country when the Judiciary and the Legislative cower in fear of the President's political power.

54 posted on 02/17/2011 1:41:45 PM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!

Wouldn’t that be something if the Supreme court ordered barry sotero to release ALL his life records?
National Enquirer would be all over that.
I do really think that no one has touched this because of the implied threat of racism charges and the DC types probably figured, what the hell, give him a chance. How much damage can the guy do?
Well now it is becoming apparent that he is operating outside the law (ignoring the Constitution) and pushing this country toward anarchy.
Hope someone with power and authority steps up and soon.

This social experiment will get a lot of innocent people killed.


55 posted on 02/17/2011 1:42:05 PM PST by Texas resident (Hunkered Down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian; King_Corey
"All laws he signed and all appointments he did are null and void.

Probably not-- Google "de facto officer doctrine."

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

Then again...perhaps de facto would not apply to Barry.

"To satisfy the doctrine, the officer must be "in the unobstructed possession of the office and discharging its duties in full view of the public, in such manner and under such circumstances as not to present the appearance of being an intruder or usurper."

http://info.libraries.vermont.gov/SUPCT/160/op92-113.txt


56 posted on 02/17/2011 1:42:17 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: rolling_stone
Right!
57 posted on 02/17/2011 1:43:41 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rolling_stone

I don’t give a sh!t about riots or what the MSM *thinks* I care about the Constitution and the Republic surviving.


58 posted on 02/17/2011 1:43:41 PM PST by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rxsid
Requiring documentation and proof of eligibility for office are clearly not a bad thing...unless of course your trying to subvert the requirements.

It's sure as hell hypocritical and inconsistent. Obama himself voted for a federal law in 2005 that forces states to verify the validity of birth certificates when they are used to apply for drivers license or ID cards. Yet these state legislature claim that doing the same for presidential candidates is going to overburden their elections protocol. Real citizens need to step up and demand some consistency on a very standard procedure.

59 posted on 02/17/2011 1:43:52 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Everything he’s done in office is on the line..........

Including appointing the two justices, which is clear cause for them to recuse?

60 posted on 02/17/2011 1:46:13 PM PST by IllumiNaughtyByNature (3(0|\|0/\/\1($ 101: (4P174L1$/\/\ R3QU1r3$ (4P174L. Could it be any more simple?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-258 next last

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