Skip to comments.Judge tosses out Army captain's complaint questioning president's birth.
Posted on 09/16/2009 9:22:01 PM PDT by Fizziks
U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land tossed out on Wednesday a complaint by an Army captain fighting deployment to Iraq by questioning the legitimacy of President Barack Obama.
Land also put attorney Orly Taitz, who represents Capt. Connie Rhodes and is a leader in the national birther movement, on notice by stating that she could face sanctions if she ever again files in his court a similar frivolous lawsuit a document that at one point the judge states that a middle school student could find irony in.
Probably not the last we hear about this, however.
I don’t understand why the so-called ‘Birthers’ are going after 0bama’s place of birth.
They would do far better to raise the question whether or not 0bama is eligible to be president as someone who has had dual citizenship, and whether or not he lost US citizenship at any point, or if his dual citizenship negates “natural born citizen” status.
An argument can certainly be made that the framers’ intent was that anyone seeking office of the President have citizenship and loyalty only to the United States of America (unless they were born before the adoption of the US Constitution.)
It appears the Bilderberg group has everyone in their pockets.
We still have hope in CA. Let’s pray that judge remains safe.
You mean upholding The Constitution is poison if you are part of the elites in control.
Hopefully Judge Carter, the Marine, will uphold his oath to The Constitution.
That's a good point, it was mccain’s and the RNC responsibility to demand prof of obumbers eligibility. But mccain just wanted to be civil, that is Bush's legacy. Normally one would expect the media to demand documents, but now we see that is only a tactic they use on pols they do not support.
I am ashamed that we have not one judge in this land that will stand up for the country.
Apparently, Sarah Palin feels the same way you do. Birthers who go on her Facebook page to post and question the constitutional validity of Obama to be POTUS were immediately banned. I went on there and posted, "The emperor has no birth certificate"... was ZOTTED immediately.
There was also ample opportunity for Soetero to produce some evidence that he is here legally. Shame some CIA guys couldn’t put their noggins together on this one.
“In his order, Land states in a footnote that Obama defeated seven opponents in a grueling primary campaign that cost the contenders more than $300 million. Obama then moved on to the general election, where he faced Sen. John McCain, who Land states got $84 million to wage his campaign.
It would appear that ample opportunity existed for discovery of evidence that would support any contention that the president was not eligible for the office he sought, Land says.”
Guess I should have included the entire quote.
That’s a good point, it was mccains and the RNC responsibility to demand prof of obumbers eligibility. But mccain just wanted to be civil, that is Bush’s legacy. Normally one would expect the media to demand documents, but now we see that is only a tactic they use on pols they do not support.
Who made it poison? Why be such a Scaredy Cat
Yeah. The Constitution is not worth the effort.
Strange. I wonder why? I would have thought Sarah would be willing to look at/consider the idea.
This is one of this otherwise stellar lady’s very few glaring shortcomings. If I had my druthers she wouldn’t even be calling the Bummer “President Obama” but only “Mr. Obama.” She accepts the popular status quo a bit more easily than is justified. She could well state that she doesn’t want her personal forums used for this debate without the need to zot her well-wishers. She has no more proof than you or I that Obama is the real McCoy.
Basically it’s the Twitter defense.
CLAY D. LAND is a candidate for impeachment but our corrupt government will not police itself.
The decision is a real bummer in that it punishes the plaintiff with the recovery of legal costs.
from the decision...
“Finally, Plaintiff has failed to establish that the granting of the temporary restraining order will not be adverse to the public interest. A spurious claim questioning the Presidents constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Courts placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so
14 lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.
For all of these reasons, the Court finds that Plaintiffs
motion for a temporary restraining order should be denied.
CONCLUSION For the reasons previously stated, Plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order is denied and Plaintiffs complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
Defendants shall recover their costs from Plaintiff.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d).
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 16th day of September, 2009.
S/Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE”
The framers' intent was to keep Alexander Hamilton out of the office.
If anyone has a legal basis for some of the more creative legal theories that have been advanced, I'd love to see them. Otherwise, they are just following the liberals down the 'judicial activism' path.
The corruption runs very deep in this country. I wonder if it is even possible to save it.
According to this judge anyone can be president of the U.S. since they don’t have to provide proof of citizenship. How does one say, “president schwarzenneger”?
That's a great ruling. When the next serial murderer comes to trial, I hope the defense remembers that line.
That’s not good. Obama has not produced anything that really says who he is and has gone to extrordinary lengths to hide whoever he is.
The politicians and others can ignore this; but it leads me to believe not many of them are honest and more to the point they are not being honest with the people if they allow Obama to get away with it.
In other words, it is a lot more than Obama being eligible or not. It is shouting corruption everywhere.
LOL, thanks for the info. good laugh to start the day. The Palin-ers vs the Birthers !
This is just common sense. The first AA president and they want to challenge him on where he was born. Perfect food for the race baiters, every night on cable TV they say: “They don't care about the issues, it's all about a black man elected president”
Cut the constitution crap, if the shoe were on the other foot MSNBC would be crying ‘constitution’ and you ‘constitutioners’ would be defending McCain or whoever was republican.. Where were you constitutioners when the supreme court violated the US constitution in Bush vs Gore?
I know my work will be cut out for me years after Obama is gone re-editing Wiki and any other online history sites about the failed Black President of the 2008 election.
I just cannot understand the reason for trying to build an image based on lies.
The truth cannot be buried forever.
Dont get me wrong, I dont care about individuals bring lawsuits. It’s that the birther movement has a ‘crackpot’ stigma , easily turned into a ‘racist’ stigma as it has been, that requires that anyone in any responsible position publically disown it. Just dont act disappointed when the court cases fail as they are all likely to. He was elected. No judge will throw out the election after months in office because of where he might be born.
Better to pass a law with a specific verification test a court can use prior to taking of office, and no the law cant be retro-active LOL
Hey troll stop cross posting to me.
RE :”Hey troll stop cross posting to me.”
Hey, crackpot, you pinged me first.
That is a drop in the bucket compared to what the usurper illegally harvested from overseas contributors
The ruling stinks to high heaven and it sounds like a copy of what the Barry's SS-troopers are arguing with judge Carter for dismissal!
Like the media outlets got a "phone call" so did judge Land!!
A new "After-Birther" was born in Georgia!!!
Are there any here who has close connection with our soldiers who can verify this???
Mclame was not eligible either!!!
Even the SCOTUS got an unreported visit from the usurper/biden, hmmm???
Beck may be onto another Canada Free Press Story that they were working with North East Intelligence.
They have documents and testimony of Major News anchors from major Networks that were threatened by Obama Administration staff, NOT to bring up the BC or Natural Born Citizen issue.
Great interview in archives at Laurie Roth (3 hours long), but I highly recommend it. They state that they are storing documents in the US and copies in Canada, and maybe one other Country, if I remember correctly. The investigator is no amateur.
(and Northeast Intelligence intro and documentation at link below)
4 August 2009: Do you remember Watergate? Thirty-five years ago this Sunday, U.S. President Richard M. Nixon submitted his letter of resignation for his role in the scandal. There was the crime - the break-in, and then there was the cover-up by the Nixon administration. There were threats, media manipulation and disinformation. It was the cover-up more than the crime itself in the aftermath of the Watergate break-in that led to the downfall of the Nixon administration. It was a politically critical time for our country, but we survived because of the strength of the U.S. constitution.
I think the judge was totally po’d at the fact Orly can’t write a brief or a motion correctly. She came off as a little over the top in this Motion. An attorney can’t call the defendent’s names or imply behavior.
Even if Orly had written this thing correctly, the judge would have thrown it out. Most of them are liberal and most don’t want to lose their jobs or be singled out as the one to go against the Big O. That’s why I hope this judge in CA does what we are hoping he does, and now that Orly has to work with the other Counsel, perhaps more convincing legal arguments will be spelled out, not ones based on emotion and “ubsubstantiated” facts. Her heart is in the right place but she has to learn the rules of conduct before a judge. “Just the facts, Jack”. That the first thing we learn as paralegals - keep the emotion out of it. Convince the court on facts.
You know what I would like to see? More breach of the Constitution cases brought against the Secretary of States and the Electorates for not vetting the candidates properly. I would also like to a lawsuit againt Nancy Pelosi for breach of constitutional law when she submitted the Nomination for Barack and Biden without the words confirming he was eligible for the Presidency. Why, in God’s name, were there two documents in the first place? Where are our constitutional law attorneys right now? Why can’t we file a class action suit as Americans against this President and Congress? We have all been hurt by his presidency. All of us, as well as our the next 3 generations, are in debt to our eyeballs because of him. We, as a nation, are losing our jobs, our farms, our banks, our money. I say we’ve been harmed and we now have standing.
Any attorneys out there ready to take this on? I’ll sign up. My livelyhood and my very existence, my health, lies in this man’s and Congress’ hands. There has to be something we can do as a nation to redress our grievances.
Sorry. Long post. I’m just fed up.
You have made it clear that you did not stand with our Florida Freepers who stayed, watched and insisted that those recounts were counted legally. There were 6-7 recounts and media recounts, some after the SCOTUS ruling, and Gore lost every one....
Now don't make up a straw argument to defeat. I said nothing about any of that,
I only said that the ruling violated the US constitution that specifically GIVES the election decisions to the states, (the Voting Rights Act is questionable too). The Federal government is not granted that power. Nor is there a right to vote. Read your constition before you claim your sole argument is 'the constitution'
BTW : The Freepers had very strong feelings on who they wanted to win, maybe that is not the best argument to use.
What's the matter with you? Who do you think that you are kidding? Here in your post # 26 on this thread, last line, sickoflibs wrote" Where were you constitutioners when the supreme court violated the US constitution in Bush vs Gore? "
I think so. But much, and I repeat MUCH, will have to be swept aside (jail time? Ceaucescu?). Attitudes, expectations, “it’s always been this way”, “we’ve always done it this way”, etc.
Guess “sickoflibs” is lying about his/her screen name. Maybe should be “slicklib”?
Now don't make up a straw argument to defeat. I said nothing about any of that,I only said that the ruling violated the US constitution that specifically GIVES the election decisions to the states, (the Voting Rights Act is questionable too). The Federal government is not granted that power. Nor is there a right to vote. Read your Constitution before you claim your sole argument is ‘the constitution’
You could win any debate by editing the debate tapes too. Brilliant!
You introduced the the straw argument, you can take the heat for it.
What heat? You mean fellow birthers?? Who cares??
Where did you get that idea?
The Superfund Law retroactively imposed strict, joint, and severe liability on firms that disposed of wastes long before the bill was passed in 1980. Bill Clinton's retroactive tax increase in 1993, is the most obvious. In fact, as retroactive tax increases go, Clinton's was not so bad and certainly not unprecedented. There have been far, far worse retroactive tax increases. In the early 1980s, Congress created a tax deduction to encourage people to sell stock in a company to that company's employee stock option plan (ESOP). To get the benefit of that deduction, Jerry W. Carlton, the executor of the estate of Willametta K. Day, sold stock to an ESOP at a loss. Engaging in what Justice Antonin Scalia later called "bait and switch" taxation, Congress in 1986 repealed the tax deduction and applied the repeal retroactively, costing the estate more than $600,000. Justice Scalia's comment notwithstanding, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the government's assessment of the tax.
So, I guess that you might agree with me sickoflibs, that the Supreme Court, the Congress and even the President have and continue to often ignore the US Constitution. Do you believe that that is a good thing?
I’ve actually studied history.
I am waiting for it’s strength. Long wait.