Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supremes get case against 'putative' President Obama
WND ^ | October 01, 2010 | Bob Unruh

Posted on 10/01/2010 6:59:23 PM PDT by RobinMasters

A new court filing that returns the issue of Barack Obama's eligibility to the U.S. Supreme Court warns that unless the judiciary makes a definitive decision in the dispute, it will be the same as allowing the political interests in the United States to amend the U.S. Constitution at will.

A petition for writ of certiorari has been filed with the high court in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision to uphold the dismissal of a case brought by attorney Mario Apuzzo on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr.

Named as defendants are Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, the House of Representatives, former Vice President Dick Cheney and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The case alleges Congress failed to follow the Constitution, which "provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate 'elected' by the Electoral College Electors."

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; chicagomob; corruption; eligibility; harvardresumefraud; naturalborncitizen; noaccountability; nobc; nobirthcertificate; nodocumentation; nointegrity; nojustice; notruth; noveritas; obama; obamavsamerica; obamavsconstitution; resumefraud; scotusvsamerica; scotusvsjay
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

1 posted on 10/01/2010 6:59:24 PM PDT by RobinMasters
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

Well, if nothing else, this will slow Obama and his Administration from their treasonous usurping of the Constitution, if only for a few minutes.


2 posted on 10/01/2010 7:05:50 PM PDT by IncPen (Educating Barack Obama has been the most expensive project in human history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters
The case alleges Congress failed to follow the Constitution, which "provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate 'elected' by the Electoral College Electors."

Alleges??? It's a been done deal. After the fact Jack!

The only out I can see for most of them is to GitRDone before the end of their term, or face charges.



3 posted on 10/01/2010 7:08:52 PM PDT by rawcatslyentist (Jeremiah 50:31 Behold, I am against you, O you most proud, said the Lord God of hosts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

‘it will be the same as allowing the political interests in the United States to amend the U.S. Constitution at will.’

NOT HARDLY


4 posted on 10/01/2010 7:09:03 PM PDT by Freddd (CNN is down to Three Hundred Thousand viewers. But they worked for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

...


5 posted on 10/01/2010 7:12:03 PM PDT by maine-iac7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters; LucyT; Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; PhilDragoo; Candor7; rxsid; ...

Ping..................


6 posted on 10/01/2010 7:14:17 PM PDT by melancholy (It ain't Camelot, it's Scam-a-lot! Zero is no Zorro and Apette is no Antoinette!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: melancholy; RobinMasters; LucyT; Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; PhilDragoo; Candor7; ...

Keep praying!


7 posted on 10/01/2010 7:17:34 PM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

‘There have been so many of these cases/the fix is in’ ping to self.


8 posted on 10/01/2010 7:31:09 PM PDT by GBA (Not on our watch!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters
I'd be curious to see if the Court would agree that Wong Kim Ark can be distinguished from the Obama facts, as this article argues:

Birth of a President

9 posted on 10/01/2010 7:43:41 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Step away from the toilet. Let the housing market flush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freddd

If the Congress and the political parties can define “natural born citizen” however they please, which apparently is the case right now, since no one can find the standard by which they approved candidates or the process for vouchsafeing the integrity of that standard, that is rather like amending (i.e., changing) the Constitution whenever they please.

Tbat’s how I read what the argument is.


10 posted on 10/01/2010 7:46:11 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Step away from the toilet. Let the housing market flush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

“A petition for writ of certiorari has been filed . . .”

Good luck with that.


11 posted on 10/01/2010 7:48:57 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Detente with the GOP nomenklatura - trust, but verify.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters
World Net Daily, perhaps trying to keep it simple, fails to mention the equal protections (14th Amendment) violations when congressmen were sent registered letters by Commander Kerchner in the Summer of 2008 asking that they investigate Obama’s eligibility. They had investigated McCain half a dozen times, held hearings, and even tried to pass a law, SB2678 and did unanimously pass a resolution, Senate Res. 511, asserting that McCain was eligible (even though he wasn't). It can't get much more clear than that. They had the audacity to to quote the part of Article II which makes Obama ineligible: "My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied. “That is mine, too,” said Leahy."

If the supreme court does not address a clear 14th amendment violation we are a nation without a foundation of law. It is whatever the ruling class says it is, and could likely lead to civil war, and is certainly leading to national bankruptcy.

A criminal justice department is denying our military access to the the vote; our money is being spent on criminal enterprises like Acorn created to deny us our sufferage rights; our courts are evading the dicta of over a dozen supreme court justices as well as the clarification in the Congressional archives by the principal author, Congressman John Bingham of the most important citizenship ruling in our history, the 14th amendment,

I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen….

If our representatives won't represent us, or uphold the Constitution, we must replace them all, and there are more than enough of us to enforce the allegiance they have promised us but ignored, as beholden as they are to to lobbyists and special interests who promise them the big money. The only legislator with the integrity to question Obama's eligibility, Nathan Deal of Georgia, was attacked as he knew he would be, with the resources for which we paid, using the IRS, the House Ethics Committee and the justice deparment. Follow the Kerchner Apuzzo writ at http://puzo1.blogspot.com

If the court continues to evade its responsibility our "government of laws, and not of men" is broken and those of us who produce the wealth must take it back for our children by whatever means necessary, since the law is impotent.

12 posted on 10/01/2010 8:04:56 PM PDT by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

It appears that the supreme court many other judges would pefer to aid and abet treason, rather than uphold the constitution.


13 posted on 10/01/2010 8:09:06 PM PDT by Waco (Bury a pig,,save America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding; RobinMasters

Here’s a post that tells me why ALL the media outlets are mum on this issue, and doubting the SCOTUS’ impartiality as well:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2597626/posts?page=40#40


14 posted on 10/01/2010 8:37:23 PM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

What makes them think these same failed arguments will convince the court this time?


15 posted on 10/01/2010 8:39:31 PM PDT by Kleon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters

Sorry, I couldn't resist. :P

16 posted on 10/01/2010 8:46:26 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinMasters
Justice Clarence Thomas, in an appearance before Congress, previously said the court has been "evading" the Obama eligibility issue:

I wonder why. Do they know something? Do they have reason to suspect something?

Perhaps they do not want precipitate nationwide riots that are likely to occur should the first black president be removed from office.

I have no doubts that the Justices lives would be seriously at risk should they remove BHO from office by a ruling from the bench.

I the USSC chooses not to hear the case they do not typically give a reason so I expect to hear nothing from them on this case.

17 posted on 10/01/2010 8:56:05 PM PDT by Pontiac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
The dissent wrote, "Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution, I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that "natural-born citizen" applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances, and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race, were eligible to the Presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not."

Typically, the dissent argues against what the majority decided...

18 posted on 10/01/2010 9:04:17 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (When the ass brays, don't reply...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Rodamala
The one on the right looks like Chad Johnson in drag.
19 posted on 10/01/2010 9:35:19 PM PDT by jarofants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

The dissent often also argues against how it sees the majority’s argument being applied in the future.

Obviously, the facts in WKA did NOT fit the criteria you quoted from the dissent, especially “the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country.” As the article at the lihk detailed, WKA’s parents most certainly were not simply passing through the country with him happening to be born here.

IOW, rather than stating this is what the majority held, this is more like a warning by the dissent that the majority’s opinion ought not be read that broadly in the future because, regardless, THOSE FACTS were not before the Court. It’s like saying “don’t get any ideas that you’ll get away with claiming that NBC means the children of parents who were here without the kind of connection to the country that these parents had. “


20 posted on 10/01/2010 9:44:48 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Step away from the toilet. Let the housing market flush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson