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

Skip to comments.

Wrotnowski Application to SCOTUS Denied by Ginsburg
Supreme Court of The United States ^ | November 26, 2008 | Supreme Court of The United States

Posted on 11/28/2008 9:26:02 AM PST by Deepest End

No. 08A469 Title: Cort Wrotnowski, Applicant v. Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State

Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Connecticut Case Nos.: (SC 18264)

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nov 25 2008 Application (08A469) for stay and/or injunction, submitted to Justice Ginsburg. Nov 26 2008 Application (08A469) denied by Justice Ginsburg.

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

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioner: Cort Wrotnowski 1057 North Street (202) 862-8554 Greenwich, CT 06831 Party name: Cort Wrotnowski Attorneys for Respondent: Richard Blumenthal Attorney General (860) 808-5316 Office of the Attorney General 55 Elm Street P.O. Box 120 Hartford, CT 06141-0120 Party name: Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; naturalborn; obama; obamatransitionfile; obamatruthfile; scotus; wrotnowski
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 next last
To: Frantzie

Do you think there is any advantage/disadvantage to lumping cases with Thomas? Or would it be better to spread to others, as you mention Scalia, Alito, what about Roberts?


21 posted on 11/28/2008 9:49:34 AM PST by Deepest End
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: garykfd

I guess that would depend on how much “foreign law” she could find to support her position.


22 posted on 11/28/2008 9:49:34 AM PST by Deepest End
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BP2; LucyT

Ping


23 posted on 11/28/2008 9:51:06 AM PST by Semper911 (When you want to rob Peter to pay Paul, you'll always have the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Why was McCain ineligiable? He was born to American parents (military) in a US Military hospital in an American military base in a US Territory. By definition that makes him a natural born citizen.


24 posted on 11/28/2008 9:52:09 AM PST by JoeA (JoeA / welcome to third world politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Deepest End
When you click on the link you get a warning notice the blog is on review for possible violation of contract.
When clicking through the link I saw nothing objectionable, just the docket info.
Think it is a left denial of service attempt? Specious complaints to shut it down?
25 posted on 11/28/2008 9:56:20 AM PST by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Deepest End

I listened to Leo last night on Plains Radio with Cort. Leo mentioned the recent Justice Scalia speech at teh Federalist Society. Leo was doing research and listening to Scalia. This dinner speech was after Leo’s case was filed and he said it was almost spooky that Scalia is speaking about not using Common Law and using I think the Constitution was almost speaking to Leo’s case.

I am not an attorney so I have no idea whether it is best to send it to Scalia or Thomas or Alito. Supposedly - Cort could send it to one after another if they keep denying it.

If SCOTUS punts on these cases they are not doing their Constitutional duty. They are one of three branches of govt created by the Framers. The Legislative and Executive (to be - Obama & McCain campaigns) have foisted an illegla election on the electorate by running two possibly ineligble candidates on voters.

Legislative also has NOT done their duty (secretaries of state) in making sure both ar eligible.

SCOTUS must step in to protect the electorate. If they do not then what purpose to they serve?


26 posted on 11/28/2008 9:56:29 AM PST by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
Some regard it as an improvement upon Donofrio.

In what way?
27 posted on 11/28/2008 9:57:25 AM PST by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic

Leo talked about that last night. Google and others on the net have been trying to discourage people from going to Leo’s blogs. he has had to start new blogs or mirror sites due to denial of service and ping attacks on his sites.

The OBots and their goon allies are very concerned about Leo’s cases.


28 posted on 11/28/2008 9:58:23 AM PST by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Deepest End
HUH?
I thought I read that this suit was already accepted at SCOTUS.
There's Denofrio and Keys. Who's the third one?

I don't think Justice Thomas should get another one. Best to spread it.

29 posted on 11/28/2008 9:58:41 AM PST by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I missed the part where she flew to Honolulu with document experts to view the evidence?


30 posted on 11/28/2008 10:00:05 AM PST by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Girlene

Try this FR thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2138847/posts


31 posted on 11/28/2008 10:01:19 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

“It was my understanding that Wrotnowski had to submit to Ginsberg, and that denial was anticipated.”

True, Ginsburg is responsible for 2nd District.

“I suspect resubmission will go to Scalia. No reason to put all the eggs in one basket with Thomas.”

Either way, it will require 4 justices to move to a hearing. The important factor is ensuring it is presented to a justice that will docket it for conference.


32 posted on 11/28/2008 10:02:42 AM PST by Deepest End
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JoeA

Supposedly he was not born in in a U.S. Military hospital. I think McCain’s case is shakier. I do think Obama is clearly ineligble even if he was born in Hawaii.

1. 14th Amnedment writer said natural born required two American citizen parents.
2. The father was a British citizens so Obama at Birth was a Brit citizen. The Framers were VERY concerned and against anyone becoming POTUS that had any issues like Obama’s. They were very worried specifically about any possibly British agents or loyalist or their offspring becoming POTUS. It was a very BIG issue to them. SCOTUS needs to consider this. The reason they are there is because of the Framers.


33 posted on 11/28/2008 10:03:16 AM PST by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Deepest End

yes - I do not trust the clerks based on the actions of Danny Bickle the clerk who appears to be the gatekeeper of what cases can be filed at SCOTUS.


34 posted on 11/28/2008 10:04:35 AM PST by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

She is just tying her tennis shoes.


35 posted on 11/28/2008 10:04:41 AM PST by Dan(9698)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Deepest End
Is it possible that we do find the BC a forgery and have grounds to impeach several judges here?

Seems to me a reasonable request to see the document and these people are deliberately covering a crime.

Either the Constitution matters or it doesn't. If it still does, they ignored their oath. If it doesn't we now have full blown anarchy.

Is there not one reporter with the nads to ask to see it at one of his many press conferences?

36 posted on 11/28/2008 10:05:54 AM PST by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
I do think Obama is clearly ineligble even if he was born in Hawaii.

If Obama was born on US soil, he is a natural born citizen thru jus solis. It wouldn't matter who his parents were except if they were diplomats accredited to the US.

37 posted on 11/28/2008 10:06:40 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: 1_Rain_Drop

HUH?
I thought I read that this suit was already accepted at SCOTUS.
There’s Denofrio and Keys. Who’s the third one?

Keyes is before the CA Supreme Court. The third is Berg.


38 posted on 11/28/2008 10:07:27 AM PST by Deepest End
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic

When you click on the link you get a warning notice the blog is on review for possible violation of contract.
When clicking through the link I saw nothing objectionable, just the docket info.
Think it is a left denial of service attempt? Specious complaints to shut it down?

Yes


39 posted on 11/28/2008 10:07:27 AM PST by Deepest End
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Amen!


40 posted on 11/28/2008 10:07:27 AM PST by Deepest End
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 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