Skip to comments.U.S. Attorneys' Office moves to dismiss Orly Taitz's Quo Warranto case
Posted on 03/02/2010 1:15:47 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan
U.S. Attorneys with the Department of Justice have moved to dismiss Orly Taitz's Quo Warranto case for lack of jurisdiction. Additionally, the U.S. Attorneys' Office asserts that any judicial or bar sanctions against Dr. Taitz are the consequences of her own actions.
"Although, to Defendant's knowledge, this is Dr. Taitzs first case in which she serves as Plaintiff, this is not her first bite at the apple, or even her second: she has unsuccessfully represented plaintiffs in at least three judicial districts seeking to raise similar claims. In each of these cases, the United States district courts have declined to find jurisdiction and have denied relief similar to the ultimate relief sought here.
Dr. Taitz's Complaint suffers from exactly the same defects that doomed many of her previous litigation efforts. Simply put, her allegations about the President's citizenship are not a concrete and particularized injury, as required to establish standing under the "case or controversy" requirement of Article III, and the harms that she has suffered from judicial and/or bar sanctions for her conduct in litigation are the consequences of her own actions and not in any way traceable to any legal claim cognizable against Defendant."
As attachments to the Motion to Dismiss, the U.S. Attorneys' Office filed the dockets from Cook v. Good, Barnett v. Obama, and Rhodes v. McDonnell and a citation from Judge Clayton Lands opinion in Rhodes v. McDonnell as examples of Dr. Taitz's failed litigation and contemptible conduct.
Defendant's Motion to Dismiss - Taitz v. Obama, Civil Action No.: 10-0151 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Defendant's Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction - Taitz v. Obama, Civil Action No.: 10-0151 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Defendant's Corrected Memorandum on Motion to Dismiss - Taitz v. Obama, Civil Action No.: 10-0151 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Dr. Taitz responded on her blog that she's too busy to look at the filings but will comment when she has a chance to read them.
Additionally, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied Dr. Taitz's motion to reinstate her appeal in Cook v. Good, which she filed late and printed double-sided in violation of court rules. The docket and the case are now closed.
Ping to an Orly Taitz whack-a-mole thread.
Can you say "malpractice," boys and girls?
I knew you could!
The only thing it would take to show the birth certificate would be a march of about 100,000 people sitting in on the national mall.
.....she is too busy to comment now....
She also appears to be too busy to learn even a rudimentary knowledge of the law or court procedures.
To busy doing what? Did someone let a TV camera get near her?
Maybe if some one told her they were fillings and not filings then it might pique her professional curiosity?
“The only thing it would take to show the birth certificate would be a march of about 100,000 people sitting in on the national mall.”
It also wouldn’t hurt to have lawyers with a clue.
Dosen’t this Taitz person come up the the REAL birth certificate every other week ?
How DARE an American citizen demand Obama satisfy the Constitution!
Go Lady Liberty!
keep holding your breath....
these are the types of things that allow the lefties to point at conservatives and holler nut case
BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA! 99.99999% chance it will be granted. .00001% chance not. Maybe they ask Obama to put a certified COLB in the record to shut some of these goobers up. But, I look for this to happen in 2012 to gut the GOP of its base.Maybe this year to help save Congress.
parsy, who bets Orly, Queen of the Birthers, hasn’t got a clue what to do...
Those details are for the little lawyers, she's the Queen of the Birthers>
I was hoping you would do this!!!
Hey, BTW, I have found out there is a Birther Grotto of True Evidence that they are holding back so none of us will tell Eric Holder. ROTFLMAO!!! Like a bunch of clowns, I suspect the Grotto is full of lemon meringue pies and seltzer bottles and at the proper moment, not now of course because its secret, but at the proper time, they will bust out of the Grotto and throw pies at each other and shoot seltzer down each other’s pants.....Too funny......
parsy, who is having way too much fun with their antics....
Keep on keepin’ on, Orly. Doing something and failing is better than doing nothing and maintaining the status quo. This gal is a true American (maybe not natural born, like our Prez) coz’ she never gives up.
Exactly why the court should grant her DISCOVERY.
Secret pies and seltzer and classified clown shoes have far
more influence than the regular kind. You WILL be assimilated.
She's busy filling out forms to run as California Secretary of State. She and Jerry Brown would be great together: Governor Moonbeam and SOS Moonbat.
As I understand quo warranto, the petition is filed in the name of the United States. If the U.S. Attorneys’ office won’t file it, one must ask the court for leave to file it. Only “interested persons” or an interested “third party” may petition the court. Standing is relevant.
I have what I’m sure will be perceived as a stupid question. Why are United States attorneys requesting this be dismissed and not Obama’s lawyers?
What a hack. Who is this woman?
>> Dr. Taitz responded on her blog that she’s too busy to look at the filings but will comment when she has a chance to read them.
Blogging about your legal proceedings is always a good idea. Its also a good idea to put in writing that you don’t have time to read your opponent’s motion.
>> Additionally, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied Dr. Taitz’s motion to reinstate her appeal in Cook v. Good, which she filed late and printed double-sided in violation of court rules
Good grief. Completely incompetent. If she actually represented anyone but her self, she should be sued for malpractice.
The DOJ defends the POTUS in any litigation, except in the case of Clinton who was sued for his as Governor of Arkansas. He had to provide his own defense.
Hopefully this will finish her off and we won’t have to hear about this ridiculous garbage any longer
I forgot the H/T to you on this. Thanks for the information.
We’re thinking she’ll turn up on a reality show fixing teeth and giving legal advice.
Add to your list stalking Supreme Court Justices.
I will go down swinging!
parsy, who will Resist!
Or giving legal advice on how to fix teeth.
I have a funny feeling she won’t quit until she is sitting in a cell.
And, appealing to the United Nations for protection!
Any judicial action against Orly is a direct result of her own actions and not malicious prosecution or persecution. As far as the persecution by Obama supporters, she can’t sue Obama for their actions.
filings.....fillings? Seen one, seen em all.
True, but they are trying to show she does not have a good motive for doing this. Slightly relevant. Also, it is a sly way of telling the judge, as if he don’t already know, that if he leaves her in, it will turn into a Birther circus.
Birthers have hurt themselves with their attitudes and the way they have approached this. Many people believe that no matter what Obama presents, it won’t matter. Like giving a moon rock to a Moon Landing denier.
Birthers haven’t believed anything to date, so what good is a hearing? OTOH, the judge may go ahead, ask Obama for a certified COLB, and dismiss the claim.
parsy, who is betting, though, she gets trounced again
This is a new one. Do you have a good link?
Sure, Dr. Orly makes mistakes. We all do. But Dr. Orly is no dummy. How many of us could go to a foreign country, learn 5 languages, establish a successful dental practice, a successful real estate business AND pass the California state bar- one of the hardest in the U.S. to pass?
She may be a mail order attorney and not a Harvard lawyer, but she IS an attorney with all the rights and privilages of a Harvard lawyer nevertheless!
The point is; she has the passion, the zeal, the courage of her convictions and the love of America and its freedoms (unlike many of our great attorneys and patriots who criticize her) that will not let her give up!
She is exhausted. She is nervous. She is frustrated. It is reported that she gets by on 4-5 hours of sleep per night, and her family is very worried about her health- as well as her safety.
She makes mistakes. But she will NOT give up. She will keep on until she gets it right.
I’m just screwing wit you. She is never going to get it right.
Orly is a nut. Isn’t Berg a truther? I read somewhere one of them is. Maybe him. If I am wrong, please let me know. I would suggest no one give their money to either of these people. free Republic or the Tea Party would probably be a lot better place to spend money.
And, Tru American Patriots don’t run off to the United Nations seeking protection.
You and Orly need to read the cases you cite instead of just cherry picking quotes that seem to agree with you.
The holding in that case is:
Other unusual situations calling for federal intervention might also arise, but there is no point in our attempting now to specify what they might be. It is sufficient for purposes of the present case to hold, as we do, that the possible unconstitutionality of a statute “on its face” does not, in itself, justify an injunction against good faith attempts to enforce it, and that appellee Harris has failed to make any showing of bad faith, harassment, or any other unusual circumstance that would call for equitable relief. Because our holding rests on the absence of the factors necessary under equitable principles to justify federal intervention, we have no occasion to consider whether 28 U.S.C. § 2283, which prohibits an injunction against state court proceedings “except as expressly authorized by Act of Congress” would, in and of itself, be controlling under the circumstances of this case.
Or a real attorney with a real case.
Are you going to argue with something that an anonymous person sent to Orly in an email and that she published as fact?