Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Citizenship (Taitz): Lightfoot vs. Bowen Back On SCOTUS Docket for 1/23/09 "Conference"
U.S. Supreme Court- Docket ^ | January 22, 2009 (presently online) | SCOTUS

Posted on 01/22/2009 12:00:43 PM PST by real_patriotic_american

No. 08A524 Title: Gail Lightfoot, et al., Applicants v. Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State

Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of California Case Nos.: (S168690)

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dec 12 2008 Application (08A524) for a stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kennedy. Dec 17 2008 Application (08A524) denied by Justice Kennedy. Dec 29 2008 Application (08A524) refiled and submitted to The Chief Justice. Jan 7 2009 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 23, 2009. Jan 7 2009 Application (08A524) referred to the Court. Jan 13 2009 Suggestion for recusal received from applicant.

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

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioners: Orly Taitz 26302 La Paz (949) 683-5411 Counsel of Record Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Party name: Gail Lightfoot, et al.


TOPICS: Issues
KEYWORDS: barackobama; bho2008; bho44; birthcerticate; birthcertificate; bithcertificate; certifigate; constitution; corruption; coverup; democratcongress; democrats; dictatorship; eligibility; federalcourt; obama; obamanoncitizenissue; obamatruthfile; orly; orlytaitz; scotus; taitz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-168 next last
According to the enclosed info and link, Orly Taitz case Lightfoot vs. Bowen is still on the SCOTUS docket for "Conference" by the Justices on January 23, 2009.

Dr. Taitz also has a version of this case filed at the Federal Court in Santa Ana, CA.

Hummmmmmmmmmm? This SCOTUS link was off yesterday afternoon, Obama again took The Oath of Office, and now it's back live. Maybe just a coincidence?

1 posted on 01/22/2009 12:00:46 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: real_patriotic_american

SCOTUS sent the maintenance guy out to look for a shovel to bury this with.


2 posted on 01/22/2009 12:03:18 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: real_patriotic_american

maybe all the hullabaloo this morning was a simple clerical issue as they wrote up new pages?


3 posted on 01/22/2009 12:08:26 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: real_patriotic_american
According to the enclosed info and link, Orly Taitz case Lightfoot vs. Bowen is still on the SCOTUS docket for "Conference" by the Justices on January 23, 2009.

Where it will be denied, like all the other cases.

Dr. Taitz also has a version of this case filed at the Federal Court in Santa Ana, CA.

Which will dismiss it for lack of standing.

Hummmmmmmmmmm? This SCOTUS link was off yesterday afternoon, Obama again took The Oath of Office, and now it's back live. Maybe just a coincidence?

A case doesn't come off the Supreme Court's docket once it's filed. Orly, who admits on her blog that she doesn't understand Supreme Court procedure, got all hysterical over a computer glitch. Had she simply called the Court Clerk's office, they would have told her that the case was never taken off the docket.

4 posted on 01/22/2009 12:08:47 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

She probably did call after office hours.


5 posted on 01/22/2009 12:11:04 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Exactly the opposite! Dr. Taitz is representing one of the candidates. Thus, her case has standing and then some.


6 posted on 01/22/2009 12:14:17 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

You’re a patronizing one. Orly Taitz, obviously like the rest of us, has very little trust in the Obama machine with it’s legion of smoke and mirrors.

I’m sure she did investigate, but was probably stonewalled “administratively” before a definitve answer was provided.

Plus it is GOOD to keep the volume up on the issue.

Do not like your tone.


7 posted on 01/22/2009 12:14:46 PM PST by dascallie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dascallie

She admitted on her blog that she called after business hours, and that, when she called back this morning, they told her it was just a computer glitch and the case was still on the docket. In the meantime, she posted a hysterical screed on the internet claiming that Obama had ordered her case off the Supreme Court docket—a legal impossibility. If she was looking for a way to hurt her credibility with the Court, she found a good one.


8 posted on 01/22/2009 12:19:45 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

That does not change the issue of “when will Obama provide his original birth certificate?” Until he proves that he is a natural born American citizen, he is NOT eligible to serve as President.


9 posted on 01/22/2009 12:23:16 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: real_patriotic_american

After having witnessed the crowd’s obasm on 1/20/09, I truly doubt that there is one person in all of government with the courage to challenge Obama’s eligibility for POTUS, and he knows it. We seem to forget that we are no longer the Home of the Brave.


10 posted on 01/22/2009 12:27:24 PM PST by 353FMG (Liberalism is the rot in Western society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG

More spectators were at Reagan’s ceremony!


11 posted on 01/22/2009 12:30:00 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

“got all hysterical over a computer glitch”

Extremely hysterical, it was embarrassing to read.

Would not want her as my mouthpiece....LOL


12 posted on 01/22/2009 12:37:17 PM PST by Nokia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

maybe all the hullabaloo this morning was a simple clerical issue as they wrote up new pages?
***Seems like a distinct possibility.


13 posted on 01/22/2009 12:39:11 PM PST by Kevmo ( It's all over for this Country as a Constitutional Republic. ~Leo Donofrio, 12/14/08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

She also got more visibility on the issue which is good. Anything that broadcasts this stuff as long and hard as posible is GOOD.

She did not hurt her credibility.

The people filing these suits have been treated abysmally and damn straight they need to broadcast the incompetence of the SCOTUS “glinch”.


14 posted on 01/22/2009 12:40:33 PM PST by dascallie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nokia

LOL LOL

Aren’t you witty:-)

NOT.

Stay on point you catty thing.


15 posted on 01/22/2009 12:42:18 PM PST by dascallie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Nokia; Lurking Libertarian

Men seem to like to use the word hysterical when referring to women.

However, since women get hysterectomies to remove the hysterical side of their personalities, I’m sure this makes men happier because it was they who devised the procedure for just such coincidences.

So, if Dr Orly Taitz has not had her hysteria removed surgically, then you are correct in stating she was acting hysterical. However, if she has had her hysteria removed surgically, then what will your reasoning be, oh wise and gracious males and masters?

/sarc


16 posted on 01/22/2009 12:44:05 PM PST by HighlyOpinionated ("...there are two things in Washington that are unbalanced—the budget and the liberals." R Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dascallie

I’m with you on this! The Orly Taitz case at the Federal Court in Santa Ana, CA. also adds viability to issue.


17 posted on 01/22/2009 12:47:31 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: real_patriotic_american
Until he proves that he is a natural born American citizen, he is NOT eligible to serve as President.

No other Presidential Candidate has ever had to present a Birth Certificate, have they?
Why Obama?

IMHO, Obama has successfully wormed his way through a glaring loophole in the Constitution. O sure, there's some mighty impressive case law on what a "Natural Born" citizen is, but who's supposed to vet candidates? Who's supposed to sue whom? SCOTUS obviously doesn't know and would have to "legislate from the bench" to solve this one.

The "Indonesian Adoption" option? Fuggedaboutit. If (IF) he was a citizen and subsequently adopted in a foreign land as a minor, he is still a citizen.
Born in Hawaii? Yeah, sure. The Attorney General of the State of Hawaii could bring criminal charges if he felt that CLB posted on the web was a forgery, but so far no one has brought it up.

Smells to me that that Kenya/Sumatra Boy has succeeded in pulling a fast one. Just like his lies on his Illinois Bar App, these issues are rapidly disappearing from the light of day.

No one even knows what is supposed to happen if some ruling authority as yet unknown finds he is ineligible after being sworn in. The Founding Fathers never imagined such criminal chutzpah, leaving us in uncharted territory.

18 posted on 01/22/2009 12:49:06 PM PST by Kenny Bunk (Obama campaigned in Kenya for Jihadist Church-Burner Odinga. Didn't McCain know?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

Bush, Reagan, Nixon, Ike, etc., etc., probably all provided their birth certificates to get into the military as I had to do.


19 posted on 01/22/2009 12:53:41 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth; hoosiermama; Frantzie; rxsid; SatinDoll; LucyT

PING!


20 posted on 01/22/2009 1:05:38 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-168 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
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

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