Just suppose it was produced...

[LadyEagle]

Some of the actions that have been ongoing. Of course, the matter could be settled if our chicken SCOTUS would give it a full hearing, which they have not done so far.

Here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:

New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

Source: WND

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

As a citizen and one who holds the constitution in high regard I have to respect the opinion of the highest court in the land as established by that amazing document.

I love my country and am grateful for the writers of the constitution who even then knew how to keep an tiny percentage of the country from wasting the court's time on ludicrous cases.




As to the oft quoted source? Well, enough said.

 

[LadyEagle]

As a citizen and one who holds the constitution in high regard I have to respect the opinion of the highest court in the land as established by that amazing document.

Except....they wouldn't give it a full hearing.....they could put the matter to rest by a full hearing.

 

[LadyEagle]

The point is that it is not true - pure and simple. He has proven his citizenship to the satisfaction of the Electoral Commission, all 50 states, Congress, and the Supreme Court.

And you have proof of this, or are you just assuming this?

What links do you have?

 

[JamieinNH]

Except....they wouldn't give it a full hearing.....they could put the matter to rest by a full hearing.

So, do we blame the court? Do we 'blame' the court everytime they don't see fit to hear something?

Don't they do their job by looking into and it and then having a hear as they see the need? Does that mean that EVERYTIME they choose to not hear a case they are to be blamed for that action?

just curious as to when we actually rely on the court and it's word and it's ability to do it's job to be enough for us..

 

[windcatcher]

Sorry, but no. On the SCOTUS, all but Ginsburg and Breyer were nominated by Republicans. These two were Clinton appointees.

What I said I said: The brotherhood protects its own and is the majority of power in all 3 branches of government.

You haven't been reading my other posts (or maybe just can't see the connection) regarding associations which go deeper than politics..... as deep as religion/cults/ and the occult...... and, sometimes deeper than kinship. In the brotherhood, there are levels of communication: the lesser are held by their blood oaths and fraternal organizations to loyalty and secrecy against even suspicions of brothers or motives: The higher up it moves the tighter it gets in defining and promoting from within its own protege's, which it finds to be maleable, unquestioning, conforming to its will. Different goals are accomplished at the attainment of various stages..... some which are designed to be oppositional and polarizing so that the uninitiated do not see or are confused...... and many are satisfied to slumber in that they think they have representation of viewpoint not realizing that even the extent of that is being controled and manipulated. The progression up the pyramid is more concentrated in the confidence, secrecy, and power, and controls and directs the elements of leadership and direction of those below without informing them to purpose or plan. But at the top is a singular design and capstone goal which is yet to occur..... a new world order. Not many nations..... but one. Not many laws but one globally observed and enforceable. Not many religions, or the triune God, but one man-god which by servatude of our customs of obediance, labors and wealth, needs and dependancies, and fear of retribution, we will serve and, in essence of these customs, worship: even our appeals will be as it is already becoming, to those in power..... not to the true and only God. Not many heads of leadership.... but one over all the world which embodies the dictates of power enforced upon the representatives of perceived regional distinctions.

No, my dear Magnetic Poles: You are wrong as to thinking only about the SCOTUS as being majority appointed by Republican Presidents.... even though they were: Each justice on the Supreme Court has also had his own party preferences before appointment..... and have a very fair representation of Democrats among them although these were appointed by the POTUS most of whom were Republican. It matters little to those at the top of the unfinished pyramid, what the party is. Loyalty and benefit to the brotherhood is the deciding factor. .............One may not believe this....... but can you name 5....... no......make that 3........... no.......make that just 1 state capital which doesn't have one symbol of the brotherhood actually connected with the design and building and dedication of it........ a Masonic stone...... or a "Lodge" associated with it. And they take a name from the Bible, Hiram, and give him a mythical and occult importance, as they converge their discipline with those of similar organizations at higher levels of leadership....... all working to establish the rule of man and the headship of man in conflict with the authority, recognition, and power belonging to God.

And we are beginning to see the fruition of this plan come together and form itself in the rapid and recent changes which have taken place since 1948 when Israel became a nation, and 1967 when JerUSAlem was captured. Just exactly where we stand and what will be our fate and what would God have us do...... and will our choice align with God's direction in obediance, or be directed by his sovereignity to fullfill his plan including judgement for our disobediance. Our choices may make a difference as to our outcome and the judgements which we will face..... but regardless of our choices we can be sure that prophecy will be fulfilled.

-----------------
The courts judge the law and evidence. The SCOTUS judges what is within or without the boundaries set by the constitution of the USA. I'm not aware of any summary determination being made regarding Obama's constitutional requirements to qualify as President. I do think the SCOTUS, has limited powers, but one which they do have is to choose to hear or refuse to hear a case and make a judgement. In this case the people have no option available to force the SCOTUS to hear a case: The only option afforded by the constitution is that of impeachment of the justices..... and that must be based on an ambiguious standard of 'bad behavior'. While the people might be able to find one or maybe two legislators to offer such a petition or censur of the courts, it is extreme to think that such could gain enough support to even vex the SCOTUS into action.

 

[Salty]

FOLKS!!!

OP STATES
"NO DEBATE"
This is a "just suppose"

C4K put it best "Ok, I'll play along..."

If you want to debate, please start another thread - or go to the other ones.

 

[LadyEagle]

Careful here, WC, you will creep some people out---the same people who would never do a Google search on Bohemian Grove.

 

[AntennaFarmer]

I think the Supreme Court would hold that Obama is qualified because his Mama was a citizen. Any statute holding otherwise would be declared unconsitutional.

Obama would stay in office.

 

[canadyjd]

I think the Supreme Court would hold that Obama is qualified because his Mama was a citizen. Any statute holding otherwise would be declared unconsitutional.

Obama would stay in office.

As demonstrated several times, according to the laws in place at the time of his birth, Obama would not be a U.S. citizen if born in Kenya because his mother had not lived in the U.S. for 5 years after her 16th birthday (she was about 19).

Playing along, I think the dems would make the same argument they made with the current treasury sec.: It doesn't matter what he's done in the past, he is the only one on the planet that can lead us into the future.

He would finish out his term, loose re-election, and make 100's of millions in speeches (which he wouldn't disclose to the IRS, like the rest of the democrats, so as to avoid paying those higher taxes:smilewinkgrin: )

peace to youraying:

 

[AntennaFarmer]

As demonstrated several times, according to the laws in place at the time of his birth, Obama would not be a U.S. citizen if born in Kenya because his mother had not lived in the U.S. for 5 years after her 16th birthday (she was about 19).

That is what I am saying.....The Supreme Court would overturn that law even if it is shown to apply.

A.F.

 

[canadyjd]

That is what I am saying.....The Supreme Court would overturn that law even if it is shown to apply.

A.F.

The law has already been changed.

To find the law unconstitutional, the Supreme Court would have to deny the precedent already set that congress has the authority to determine citizenship requirements by law for those not born in the U.S.

It is unlikely the SOTUS would do that, IMHO.

I do not believe the SOTUS would hear this case in a million years. The lower courts have ruled in favor of Obama. That will be the last word.

peace to youraying: