Posted on 11/20/2008 8:28:49 AM PST by Candor7
On December 5, 2008, only ten days before the electoral college votes, the nine Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court will meet in private to review Obama's citizenship status.
Leo Donofrio's case, "Leo C. Donofrio, v. Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey, United States Supreme Court Docket No. 08A407," regarding Obama's citizenship has reached a new level. The case has been "distributed for conference."
This docketing today by the court should send ripples of fear through the Obama camp. Obama has been proceeding at lightening speed to put together a cabinet and take possession of the White House with the hope that he won't have to answer the question of whether or not he was "at birth" a "natural born citizen."
Every major news network, print and cable news like FOX, CNN and MSNBC, have ignored all the court cases challenging Obama's eligibility as sore losers or conspiracy theories. It might be in their best interest at this point to report this critically important meeting to take place on December 5, 2008, or lose what little credibility they have left.
If four of the nine Justices vote to hear the case in full review, oral argument may be ordered. The conference is scheduled for December 5, 2008, ten days before the meeting of the Electoral College…
The case originally sought, pre-election, to have the names of Barack Obama, John McCain, and Roger Calero removed from New Jersey ballots, and for a stay of the "national election" pending Supreme Court review of whether those candidates were eligible under the Constitution as natural born Citizens, as is required by Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States.
Leo Donofrio brought his case from a lower New Jersey court to the NJ Supreme Court -- was denied -- and then he filed an emergency stay application in the United States Supreme Court on Nov. 3, 2008, before the Honorable Associate Justice David Souter. Justice Souter denied the emergency stay application on Nov. 6.
Leo Donofrio renewed the application, as per Supreme Court Rule 22.4, to the Honorable Associate Justice Clarence Thomas by way of Express mail on Nov. 14. The application arrived at the Supreme Court on Nov. 17 and was submitted directly to Justice Thomas.
On Nov. 19, the case was docketed for full conference of all nine Justices and scheduled for December 5, 2008. It is not known at this time the exact details of how the case came to be "DISTRIBUTED for Conference".
Background on "The Justices Conference" is discussed as follows by the Supreme Court Historical Society:
"No outsider enters the room during conference. The junior Associate Justice acts as "doorkeeper," sending for reference material, for instance, and receiving it at the door...
Five minutes before conference time, 9:30 or 10 a.m., the Justices are summoned. They exchange ritual handshakes and settle down at the long table. The Chief sits at the east end; the other Justices sit at places they have chosen in order of their seniority…
The Chief Justice opens the discussion, summarizing each case. The senior Associate Justice speaks next, and comment passes down the line. To be accepted for review, a case needs only four votes, fewer than the majority required for a decision on the case itself. Counsel for the litigants are directed to submit their printed briefs so that each Justice has a set several weeks before argument.
My take on why the talk radio are staying away is that they are afraid, yes believe you me, they will be accused of precipitating tremendous violence that can culminate in civil war.
The threats of the left and their allies to riot for "stealing the third election" especially from the first elected black president, are formidable tools for censorship.
Thanks, TLI, you’re added. Since you weren’t on the list a minute ago, here’s the last ping; you might be able to help, too.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2135131/posts?page=165#165
Yeah, like Roe v Wade.
Surprise! I happen to see this (or Alan Keyes lawsuit) covered on a Spanish TV station. I believe it was Univision. So far no major English outlets yet....
The Ohio governor needs to go ahead and name a replacement senator as quickly as possible, just in case Obama is denied the presidency and wants his old job back.
IMHO, I continue to believe we are far, far better off without the LSM putting their heavy left slant on this. He would be tried and exonerated by the media long before it got to SCOTUS.
If the media were all over this right now, and let’s fantasize for a minute that they were “Fair and balanced”, riots and civil unrest would already be happening in the urban streets...influencing public opinion AND SCOTUS to disregard our constitution.
Let it play out below the radar and if we get what we SHOULD out of SCOTUS, the media will get on board. Just make sure your ammo is dry!!!!!
His lawyers have done nothing but stonewall,his media friends have tried to ridicule all questioners;he IS a fraud.
I don't believe any riots would be worse than those we've seen before,in which fools tore up their own neighborhoods.
I too have thought people in high places have known something was not right about all of this. I have looked into the eyes of Obama and on the night of his Chicago celebration I saw not a panic of sorts — not the deer in t headlights look but a pensive look. Another look earlier in the campaign was “mean eyes”.
ROFLMAO!
You mean, except for the morons who voted for Obamessiah(see them here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8), there are STILL people who believe in the credibility of the MSM??
INcredible!!
In which case he fails the natural born citizen requirement.
He has very mean eyes, and I never saw what people found “charming” about him. But be that as it may, I’m betting he’s not the only one who knows he’s not legit. I’m sure the Dems - some of them, at least - were probably aware of this and took all the precautions way in advance, not only refusing to release the birth certificate but sealing every single document relating to him (college transcripts, etc.).
We know absolutely nothing about this man. Oh, wait, the only thing we do know is that he lied on his IL Bar application, when he said he had never used any other names than the ones under which he registered (Barack Hussein Obama). He had used both other first names and last names, of course, but I guess it’s ok in his case...
The law is not my bailiwick, but,
it appears that the Constitution is pretty straightforward on eligibility requirements.
If the Justices on the USSC ignore the clearly defined requirements on this issue,
then it seems logical to conclude
that the Constitution is now to be considered invalid-by all the Justices, including Roberts,Scalia, Alito and Thomas.
If the USSC punts on this and down the line,
evidence surfaces clearly showing that Obama was not a natural born citizen,
the reputation and integrity of the USSC will be damaged and the future of the Constitution will be in doubt.
Is this a risk that Roberts,Scalia, Alito and Thomas are willing to take ?
PLEASE! Don’t do that to Ohio. We have enough problems. Obama was an Illinois senator.
And in this case which federal statute will they be interpreting?
And completely silent on who checks that eligibility and how it is done.
There’s no rush that I see in determining this question, although it would be better for the country if it were settled before he’s sworn in. (Keeping in mind past Democrats and their preference for their own ambition over concern for America: Clinton, Gore, Kerry, et al.)
If it is fact that Obama committed a fraud on the country by failing to disclose that he was born in Kenya, he would be disqualified and his election would be rescinded, or some time in the future he would be removed from office.
“We are a nation of laws, not men.” US v. Nixon, 1974
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401——000-.html
§ 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
I think you meant, “ascended straight from hell” didn’t you?
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.