Posted on 06/15/2009 11:09:53 AM PDT by rxsid
A concerned Pennsylvania citizen and the pro se Plaintiff in Schneller v. Cortes, James Schneller had originally brought a suit against his Secretary of the Commonwealth, Pedro Cortes, alleging that Pennsylvania’s certified ballots were improperly transmitted to the federal government due to a stay of such activity and that Sen. Arlen Specter had been improperly placed as an Elector for the McCain/Palin ticket. His application for Writ of Certiorari had originally been denied by Associate Justice Souter back on January 8, 2009 (docket).
According to the case’s current docket (also referenced via my “Supreme Court Info” widget on the sidebar, to the right (scroll down)), on June 3, the case was “DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 18, 2009,” whereby the Supreme Court Justices will consider whether or not to grant the case cert.
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6366
Ping.
I hate to be negative on such an important issue but
“DISTRIBUTION” seems to be the way the Supremes throw cases into the waste paper basket.
Indeed. I have extremely little faith that this one will make it past Distribution for Conference. I would love to be wrong though. Guess time will tell.
Most cases ‘distributed’ do get rejected from hearing by the court. But it is the way all cases that get heard by the full court are bumped into hearing status. The Roberts court has already exposed their bias, so don’t expect this to get any further than any of the other cases. Until the nation is angry at the affirmative action figure frawqud-in-chief, the federal oligarchy is not going to challenge his illegitimacy because they have been stealthily threatened that riots would result if he is removed. Under other reality it would be called extortion, but the democrats won the election and ended the Constitutional Republic, so the serfs (read taxpayers) have no voice now.
the problem is stating the injury... even if it was invalid, it doesn’t change the effect of the election since McCain still lost
~~DING!
Don’t see how the premise of this case can help the BC cause? What is their plan of action?
and Specter voted for McCain... the BC issue is something entirely separate from what is at the USSC (or at least from my understanding of the site)
"I’ve filed a petition for review No, 199 MM 2008, to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, seeking a writ of mandamus and an immediate injunction ordering the Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth to demand proof from Senator Barack Obama of his sworn statement, filed with his application for placement on the ballot, that he is qualified as a natural born citizen under the United States Constitution.
The petition seeks urgent attention to the requested injunction and additionally requests an injunction preventing the certification of the vote and of the Pennsylvania electors ballot, by the Secretary, including any certification to Pennsylvania’s Governor, and postponing of the scheduled meeting of the electors, which by law usually occurs on the third Monday of December.
I seek in the request for injunction, a submitting of proof of birthplace and of any additional elements required to be a natural born citizen, by Senator Obama, prior to the certification of the electors’ vote by the State to the Governor, and prior to certification that would then occur to the Joint Session of Congress, which would convene for the purpose of formalizing the electoral vote in early January."
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1751
I may (of course) be reading or interpreting this case wrong, but it looks as if the plaintiff is (was?) looking for proof of qualifications for Barry to have been on the PA ballot.
I should say that the plaintiff appears to be looking for proof that Barry is qualified as a natural born citizen under the United States Constitution, and therefor to be POTUS. Not to be qualified to be on the ballot, as anyone can (apparently) be on the ballot. Even Green Card (non Citizen of any kind) holders.
The full docket history: http://www.scribd.com/doc/9952691/Schneller-v-Cortes-Supreme-Court-Report-010909
Thank you.
Bump read.
What if we bury the SCOTUS in these appeals??????
I’d be inclined to think that it would make far more of an impact if (for example) 1,000 appeals come their way, rather than 1 appeal.
And turned down by the court. Docket 08-9797
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.