Posted on 12/29/2010 10:49:16 AM PST by rxsid
"Gregory S. Hollister, Petitioner
v.
Barry Soetoro, et al.
Docketed: November 23, 2010
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Case Nos.: (09-5080)
Decision Date: March 22, 2010
Rehearing Denied: August 23, 2010
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nov 22 2010 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 23, 2010)
Nov 22 2010 Appendix of Gregory S. Hollister filed. (Volumes I, II, III)
Dec 22 2010 Waiver of right of respondents Barry Soetoro, et al. to respond filed.
Dec 29 2010 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 14, 2011.
Attorneys for Petitioner: John David Hemenway
Party name: Gregory S. Hollister
Attorneys for Respondents: Marc Erik Elias Perkins Coie, LLP Counsel of Record
I put my money on ‘to none’.
That's what the Barry supporters are trying to allege. In other words, anchor baby's, who are currently "afforded" U.S. citizenship even though they (in the mothers womb) and their mother (at least) are in the country illegally, that such an anchor baby would be considered a "Natural Born Citizen" as known and intended by the framers...and thus POTUS eligible. It's 100% subversive B.S.
Assuming Sr. was in fact his legal father at birth, regardless of where he was born, Barry was born a subject to the crown of her majesty the Queen of England...by birthright, inherited from his foreign father. It's impossible, under those circumstances, that he is or ever was a Natural Born Citizen.
If Sr. isn't his legal father at birth (Sr. was married at the time he allegedly impregnated Barry's alleged mother), then Barry has some explaining to do re: why he took many oaths of office under the name "Obama" and why his campaign web site proudly displayed a forged government document.
Or Farrakhan is his father. May as well be as Farrakhan has claimed him savior.
as plausible, if not more so, than most out there regarding the issue of place of birth.
Haven’t you bleepin’ idiots learned a damn thing?"
Not sure why you would consider Hollister and idiot. He's seeking the truth about Barry's eligibility status. How about Hemenway? Do you consider him an idiot?
The problem with that stance is only a court of law can "get to the facts."
Vigilant citizenry can talk all they want amongst themselves but these words suggest facts are trumped by action of the voters. When has "Will of the People" stopped a court from striking a voter approved law down as unconstitutional?
The "birther" questions are the easiest ever to settle. It amazes me the issue continues to be presented without having been definitively resolved.
The possibilities are this is a red herring when there's no issue and it's just seen as good political strategy, or there is an issue. I lean towards the former because it smells like Dem politics.
We know if these questions were about a Republican, all records, no matter the law or how tightly sealed, would have been leaked a dozen times over by now.
It was a joke. I'm a fan of Justice Thomas.
Sadly there are some overzealous birthers who are willing to trash any solid conservative who does not sufficiently promote the cause to their satisfaction. Justice Thomas happens to be one...falsely accusing him of evading the Obama eligibility issue.
If you haven't, read this book...
An interesting behind the scenes look at the end of the Rehnquist Supreme Court. It provides proof that Thomas is not only a smart guy, but dispels the silly notion that he was just copying Scalia's homework. Quite the contrary. One of Thomas' first cases had him persuading Scalia to change his opinion.
That was the Kerchner case, and the 2 justices were requested in writ to recuse themselves. They refused to and the writ was not granted.
It means that this is going to scotus and that is why Matthew opened his mouth. Bambi is going to show a birth certificate and the next two years it will be about birthers and how they are part of the tea party.
----------------------------------------------------
Problem is, a B.C. that shows Barry was born in HI only answers part of the question.
Regardless of where he was born, Barry was born owing allegiance to a foreign government...inherited by birthright from his foreign father. At best, Barry was born with divided allegiance. He never was then, nor is now a Natural Born Citizen because of that. So, a B.C. would only confirm that he does have U.S. citizenship...to go along with his British citizenship.
I have always wondered how many of these Obama BIRTHER and Placenta law suits there have been. I found this.
http://citizensagainstproobamamediabias.wordpress.com/birth-certificate-posts/
Absolutely nothing. This is the process by which the SCOTUS decides which of the literally thousands of cases it will accept for determination (the number is usually around 90 per term). The word "conference" is misleading because SCOTUS summarily denies certiorai, without discussion, for nearly all of the cases that are filed with the court.
The SCOTUS will summarily deny certorari in this particular case for the same reason it has denied certioari to the other 'birther cases" because (a) each state enacts its own laws with respect to the placement of a candidate on the ballot; and (b) under the laws of nearly all if not all states, the time to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for public office, including, but not limited to the POTUS, is when the name is placed on the ballot PRIOR to the election. Why? Because elections are expensive and require finality, and a successful challenge to the winning candidate's qualifications after the election, could require a "do-over" election at great expense, uncertainty, and delayed finality. For example, IIRC someone in the state of Texas challenged McCain's qualifications at the time his name was placed on the ballot prior to the election. Just about any opposing candidate or party could have challenged Odumbo's qualifications, just as McCain's qualifications were challenged. They were not, and as a result, the statute of limitations to initiate such a challenge expired prior to the election
My advice: Stop wasting time, money, braincells, and bandwidth on the pending birther lawsuits. Instead, challenge Odumbo's constitutional qualifications when his name is placed on the ballot prior to the 2012 election. The challenge should be brought in as many Red Sates as possible, because throwing him off the ballot in one state does not guarantee that he will be disqualified in all states.
I suppose they are waiting for their talking points. Or...Maybe the DNC has stopped paying them and wants Obama gone.
At the very least, there's no question he would be considered POTUS eligible. Anyone who claims to want to support and defend the Constitution....all of it, should be concerned about someone in office who isn't Constitutionally qualified. Not to mention the precedent it sets. The one that says someone born owing allegiance to a foreign government is eligible to be the Commander inf Chief of the armed forces of the U.S.
No doubt that Joe, bite me, Biden is a dufus...however, I don't doubt that he respects this country. Quite unlike ole' Barry.
We may never know....
When has such habit been broken?
I am sure many will challenge him in the 2012 election.
He still won’t unseal his college or birth records. He will say the very challenge to him is racist.
The best idea is the People V. ABC,CBS,NPR,ABC,CNN,MSNBC,NBC et al
I believe this is the only one that is of the Interpleader type. The case, filled originally by Berg, can be found here (Dec. 29, 2008).
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.