WOW: Suprise Obama Eligibility Case Hits The Supreme Court Nov 23.(Kerchner Vs Obama)

[USArmyRetired]

Now this is encouraging news to hear isn't it? This is starting to get interesting as the republicans come off a historic win and it has now been confirmed that Obama's supreme court pic Kagan was a cornerstone in squashing some of the other eligibility cases that has been against him as her role as solicitor general. Does this mean she would have to recuse herself since she was involved before? I would think that the 2 would be asked to recuse themselves, if they didn't do so voluntarily. Recall, as of 10/4/10, Kagan had already recused herself from 25 of the (then) 51 cases the court had accepted up till then due to a conflict of interest type situation. IF they were recused, that would leave a strong balance of "conservative" leaning justices of 4, the "swing" vote with Kennedy who said he wasn't leaving the bench til Barry was out of office and then 2 "lib" justices.




Interesting link to read:
A Place to Ask Questions to Get the Right Answers


No. 10-446
Title: Charles Kerchner, Jr., et al., Petitioners
v.
Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.
Docketed: October 4, 2010
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Case Nos.: (09-4209)
Decision Date: July 2, 2010

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sep 30 2010 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 3, 2010)
Nov 3 2010 Waiver of right of respondents Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al. to respond filed.
Nov 3 2010 Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Western Center for Journalism.
Nov 8 2010 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 23, 2010

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

More craziness from the Crazy Old Uncle In the USMB Attic, Retired Army Nut?

 

[rdean]

I don't see why? Scalia went duck hunting with Cheney when Cheney, three weeks later, went to the Supreme Court for holding illegal secret meeting with energy companies to set American energy policy. The results of these meetings are part of what brought our economy down.

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

While Scalia and Cheney are avid hunters and longtime friends, several experts in legal ethics questioned the timing of their trip and said it raised doubts about Scalia's ability to judge the case impartially, the newspaper pointed out.

But Scalia rejected that concern Friday, telling the Times, "I do not think my impartiality could reasonably be questioned."

Federal law says "any justice or judge shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might be questioned," the Times notes.

Scalia-Cheney Trip Raises Eyebrows - CBS News

 

[antagon]

Now this is encouraging news to hear isn't it?

sell everything! donate it all to this campaign!! this is the one!!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, boy. USA Retired may petition the SC with probably a better chance of being heard than Kerchner.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Now this is encouraging news to hear isn't it? This is starting to get interesting as the republicans come off a historic win and it has now been confirmed that Obama's supreme court pic Kagan was a cornerstone in squashing some of the other eligibility cases that has been against him as her role as solicitor general. Does this mean she would have to recuse herself since she was involved before? I would think that the 2 would be asked to recuse themselves, if they didn't do so voluntarily. Recall, as of 10/4/10, Kagan had already recused herself from 25 of the (then) 51 cases the court had accepted up till then due to a conflict of interest type situation. IF they were recused, that would leave a strong balance of "conservative" leaning justices of 4, the "swing" vote with Kennedy who said he wasn't leaving the bench til Barry was out of office and then 2 "lib" justices.




Interesting link to read:
A Place to Ask Questions to Get the Right Answers


No. 10-446
Title: Charles Kerchner, Jr., et al., Petitioners
v.
Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.
Docketed: October 4, 2010
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Case Nos.: (09-4209)
Decision Date: July 2, 2010

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sep 30 2010 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 3, 2010)
Nov 3 2010 Waiver of right of respondents Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al. to respond filed.
Nov 3 2010 Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Western Center for Journalism.
Nov 8 2010 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 23, 2010

something to keep an eye on. But if this is true look who will be in line as President.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And silliness personified shows up: hey, bigrebnc.

 

[USArmyRetired]

reports on August 4, 2010, that: :

“the same Elena Kagan nominated by the commander in chief to be the next justice on the U.S. Supreme Court has actually been playing a role for some time in the dispute over whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House.

Here’s the connection. Kagan served as solicitor general of the United States from March 2009 until May of this year. In that role, she legally represented the U.S. government in numerous cases coming before the Supreme Court. A simple search of the high court’s own website reveals Kagan’s name coming up at least nine times on dockets involving Obama eligibility issues.

The fact Kagan handled these cases and is now Obama’s first choice for the high court is raising some eyebrows. “She was the solicitor general for all the suits against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural-born citizenship,”

Before It's News

To say that she would have a major conflict of interest in any case regarding Barry's eligibility is a serious understatement.

It would be difficult for most clear thinking people to understand how Sotomayor could possible stay on such a case either...since her being there is a direct result of being nominated by the Obama himself.

 

[Oscar Wao]

Well, Retired, I'm sure your Stormfront pals will be pleased.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I don't see why? Scalia went duck hunting with Cheney when Cheney, three weeks later, went to the Supreme Court for holding illegal secret meeting with energy companies to set American energy policy. The results of these meetings are part of what brought our economy down.

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

While Scalia and Cheney are avid hunters and longtime friends, several experts in legal ethics questioned the timing of their trip and said it raised doubts about Scalia's ability to judge the case impartially, the newspaper pointed out.

But Scalia rejected that concern Friday, telling the Times, "I do not think my impartiality could reasonably be questioned."

Federal law says "any justice or judge shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might be questioned," the Times notes.

Scalia-Cheney Trip Raises Eyebrows - CBS News

Wow! The USMB Attic is full. That Crazy Old Uncle USArmyReitred is collecting all that big government money that Obama doles out. Good thing there really aren't any death panels in his government sponsored health plan.

 

[USArmyRetired]

Well, Retired, I'm sure your Stormfront pals will be pleased.

You should be worried about this constitutional crisis that is taking place. I know one thing and this man is not eligible and a de facto officer doctrine (DFOD) would not save Obama or the Dems from destruction. If the truth ever became evident, we would see a conspiracy to commit fraud and obstruction of justice. In all the cases, the officers in question became known after the fact...that the defendants found out later that the officers had no right to their offices. The new House of Representatives can subpoena all of his birth records, or anything else that might bear on the issue. In a legal sense, according to the de facto officer doctrine, Obama’s takeover was quite literally a coup.

 

[antagon]

You should be worried about this constitutional crisis that is taking place. I know one this and that this man is not eligible and a de facto officer doctrine (DFOD) would not save Obama or the Dems from destruction.

more.... more.... call up guatama.... more ....more.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Usarmyretired, sir, if the supreme court hears the case and then rule unanimously in Obama's favor will you grab your 40 ounce bottle of wine, crawl back into your large brown paper box, and shut the fuck up?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Do bigred and USArmyRetired (who collects big government checks and health care) "have questions on how the Bible relates to Obamas Citizenship status, uh, it goes deeper than they may believe, thats why they should log on and listen."

- A Place to Ask Questions to Get the Right Answers

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Kagan will have to recuse herself because she did all of Obama homework for him at law school

 

[antagon]

Do bigred and USArmyRetired (who collects big government checks and health care) "have questions on how the Bible relates to Obamas Citizenship status, uh, it goes deeper than they may believe, thats why they should log on and listen."

- A Place to Ask Questions to Get the Right Answers

1st corinthians provides an amicus curiae for the writ of certiorari ex parte el presidente et al legislatirae democraticus

 

[goldcatt]

I can't keep any of them straight anymore. Is this the one where they claim Obama's father was a Canadian donkey, or the one where he was plucked out of a cabbage patch in Paraguay?

 

[USArmyRetired]

I can't keep any of them straight anymore. Is this the one where they claim Obama's father was a Canadian donkey, or the one where he was plucked out of a cabbage patch in Paraguay?

Neither. What do you like about the specifics of the case in the link?

 

[antagon]

my favorite part is the equal protection standing farce.

 

[goldcatt]

You caught that too? It would help if they understood the concept of standing and how to go about getting it...or at least making an argument for it that passes the giggle test.