If he stated that the voters trump the Constitution (in effect), then he’s not the upright jurist everyone was saying. Mob rule.
Noooo! This can’t be. I was told this judge was untouchable./s
I think he’s saying that the Constitution does not allow the judicial branch to interfere . . . oh, forget . . . that’s an outdated conservative belief, anyway.
“I’m no lawyer, but it looks like the Judge has been had. He granted the motion to dismiss the suit against zer0. He stated that over 69 million people wanted the usurper and he wouldn’t overthrow him. In saying so, he is also saying that The Constitution is no longer in effect.”
You are exactly right. However, it is now out of Carter’s court, who I believe would have thrown roadblocks up in front of her every step of the way, and now can go to a higher court.
mob rule (majority vote) trumps the Constitution
damn shame, it was a good run while we lasted
Did he really say that? That's pretty bizarre- if 69 million people voted to murder someone, would that make it OK?
What does it matter what one or 69 million people think- the constitution can be overridden because 69million people want to? Doesn't that require a CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION?
In his ruling he quite clearly states that the Plaintiff was asking the court to set the Constitution aside and do something the court had no Constitutional authority to do.
Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by “We the People”–over sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.
That part did not sound like the same Judge Carter who presided over the Oct. 5th hearing.
Comparing the Judge's signature on the 5 September 8 Order setting the Scheduling Conferance to the on this document, they appear *Identical*. Now it's possible that the Clerk just pastes a copy of the Judges signature into these documents, and if so, then they would be identical, but if he signs them individually, they would not be identical. Very similar, but not identical. (I copied the signatures out of the PDF files, and then paste them one above the other in a Word document to make the comparson easier.)
You need to go read the p. 29 of the Order to see what the Judge said and the reasoning he used to reach that decision.
Click the following link, grab the scroll bar on the right side of the order and pull it down to the Disposition: page 29 and read what he said.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21808122/Judge-Carter-Ruling-on-MTD
The only way to remove Obama after he was sworn in is through constitutional measures ie impeachment which many of us have said all along. Also folks,ready to start working towards GOP victory in 2010? We can do this. Also don’t send anymore money to Orly. Send it to the RNC.