Press release: 3 years after the case against Obama was originally filed, the 9th Circuit dismisses it saying it is moot, too late
Posted on | November 2, 2015 | 57 Comments
Press release: 3 years after the case against Obama was originally filed, the 9th Circuit dismisses it saying it is moot, too late
Law offices of Orly Taitz
We have seen the courts simply covering up Obama’s use of bogus IDs. All of the cases filed against Obama prior to the general election were dismissed because they were not ripe yet. The case filed after the election was dismissed because it is moot. This is a total outrage and a cover up of the usurpation of the US presidency.
Further, the court erroneously stated that the plaintiffs did not seek injunctive relief, the court is wrong. Plaintiffs indeed seek the injunctive relief and it was denied.
Further, the court is sending a message to the secretaries of state and lower court judges: discriminate between the candidates, commit treason, cover up crimes and forgery and theft of IDs and we will further cover it up by saying: too late.
Bottom line, this is yet another proof that we do not have a system of Justice and any and all crimes committed by the establishment’s chosen puppets will be covered up by judges. This is tyranny!
Comments
57 Responses to “Press release: 3 years after the case against Obama was originally filed, the 9th Circuit dismisses it saying it is moot, too late”
Leave a Reply
EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !
Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day
OrlyTaitzEsq.comTAITZ REPORT
Official Facebook
IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!
Historic DVD Now Available!
DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling.
---------
To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.
Advertisement / Sponsors
29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
Ste 100
Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
orly.taitz @gmail. com
(949) 766-7687
--------------------------------------
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
--------------------------------------
Bumper Sticker
$9.99 thru PayPal--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------Orly Taitz Photo Collections
November 2nd, 2015 @ 9:38 am
Flagrant judicial abuse again, but predictable. It is too big for them to let justice prevail. When BHO is determined to be the Manchurian President, then all the laws, executive orders, mountain name changes, etc., will be null and void. The truth is very important, so we must continue to press on. Perhaps Trump can mention this ruling when the media brings it up. You can bet they will not allow Ted Cruz to become President, but will wait until he is on the ballet, fight with the judiciary, resulting in a democrat win. Appeal this decision, definitely!
November 2nd, 2015 @ 10:18 am
There’s an old saying. “We tried the soap box, the ballot box and the jury box. It may well be time to open the cartridge box!!”
November 2nd, 2015 @ 10:50 am
The willful treason within the federal government is so pervasive, I can understand why there should be the death penalty for this. When towing a party line over morality and God is to the detriment of society and ultimately to your children’s future is plain evil and shameless. When will the nation’s governors order their state houses to convene secession? Lord have mercy on us all.
November 2nd, 2015 @ 11:13 am
Danny, you are correct, it’s considered to big prosecute.
A few more reasons why no action on the usurper, and none forthcoming:
The leadership of Congress are most complicit, the rest of Congress and the Judiciary is complicit in that they have done nothing to expose Obama’s usurpation and everything to cover for it. That in itself in misprision of treason as a minimum and more likely treason itself. Treason, once committed, cannot be un-committed. They will do nothing to expose Obama’s fraud. This has progressed way too far for the truth to prevail now. Just imagine a constituent of a member of Congress who had lost a loved one in war, having been sent into that war by a usurper pResident. There would be no excuse that member of Congress could make that would satisfy the constituent. Multiply that times thousands, plus decisions affecting the lives of millions, made by polices put in place by a fake president and approved by Congress. Judges making decisions affecting thousands and sometime millions after being appointed by Obama and approved by Congress, Treaties signed by Obama with foreign nations would be invalidated.There is no end to the complications for Congress of exposing the truth about Obama after 7 years of allowing him to do anything he wants.
Congress and the Judiciary’s immediate goal is to get Obama over the finish line in 2017 still officially considered a legitimate president. They will do anything to make that happen, no matter what the regime has in store for America in the regime’s, (we hope), last year. The fraud/hoax is simply too big to prosecute and the decision was made years ago to ride out the usurpation and pretend it never happened.
November 2nd, 2015 @ 11:14 am
The court is basically stating there is a new statute of limitation in reference to fraud, and forgery as applied to the qualifying credentials to hold office. Once in office, the infraction ceases to exist. Is there any doubt that we are now a banana republic?
November 2nd, 2015 @ 11:15 am
With moron supporters like these (whose incitement to violence you are encouraging) wonder America is a joke. And if you don’t like it here, why not take your own advice and go back home. I’m sure free speech flourishes in Moldova.
November 2nd, 2015 @ 11:18 am
Should publish names and addresses of people in 9th ckt involved in this crime. Not moot for another year while the Indonesian in our White House steals from us and brings in millions of illegal aliens infected with parasites and incurable diseases without any exams.
November 2nd, 2015 @ 11:30 am
The last time we had a tyrant in this country, his name was dishonest Abe. He pushed the War between the States. 700,000 men were killed. He didn’t care, and neither will this Tin Pot Dictator.
November 2nd, 2015 @ 11:46 am
1. “The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument.”
They did not want to hear the oral arguments as they would have had to rule in plaintiff’s favor.
2. “President Obama is currently serving his second term as President of the United States, and is therefore constitutionally precluded from serving as President again.”
He is constitutionally precluded from serving at all as he is not a natural borne citizen.
3. “However, the natural-borne-citizen clause of the Constitution applies only to eligibility for the office of President of the United States.”
Not true. “However, no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall eligible to that of Vice-President of the
Unites States.” See Amendment XII.
Furthermore, the Speaker of the House is third in line to the Presidency. The Speaker does not have to be a natural borne citizen to be the Speaker, but must be a natural borne citizen to become President.
Harry
November 2nd, 2015 @ 12:07 pm
Yeah…HB:…LOL! I agree!
And these judges who are allowing this, will find the wrath of Patriots someday…
And they will be held responsible for not doing their job!
They have got the Patriots in America really hot about this…and I am ready to Lock-N-Load!
November 2nd, 2015 @ 12:15 pm
Hey, poster #6:…
Why don’t you leave and go to some 3rd world POS nation?
You’re just an uneducated, low-life, that can’t stay off the drugs and alcohol!
Only psycho retards post your kind of junior high B.S.!
Grow up, simple-mind!
November 2nd, 2015 @ 12:49 pm
My overall take is that the Court was afraid to decide on the merits.
Andrew, what do you think about that?
November 2nd, 2015 @ 12:51 pm
And the fraud continues with candidates like Cruz, Rubio and Jindal.
November 2nd, 2015 @ 1:27 pm
Idiocy of the 9th never fails to disappoint
November 2nd, 2015 @ 1:42 pm
Paul Marko, “NONE WHATSOEVER!”
November 2nd, 2015 @ 2:46 pm
AND, just who is surprised with the 9th circus decision??
November 2nd, 2015 @ 4:00 pm
obama tries to go around federal judge hanen
https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/the-administration/258689-leaked-dhs-memo-shows-obama-might-circumvent-dapa
November 2nd, 2015 @ 5:09 pm
firat it was to early next it was in the wrog court now its to late…. what the hell has happened? someone please remove those damn liberal judges and that ass president… there has to be a way….
will
November 2nd, 2015 @ 5:11 pm
harrry
And the fraud continues with candidates like Cruz, Rubio and Jindal.
now add the asshole obummer to the mix and which would you vote for?
to me any of them would be better than that traiter… when this country was first founded i believe a lots of judges and politicians and yes even the bastard obummer would have faced trials for treason and faced a firing squad
will
November 2nd, 2015 @ 9:21 pm
Our only hope of having justice is electing Donald Trump as president. No doubt Trump will unseal everything Obama sealed, and appoint Ted Cruz as AG to go after Obama.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 4:53 am
It’s deja vu all over again. In Nazi Germany the judiciary allowed everything Hitler did without question.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 5:53 am
Appeal this!
November 3rd, 2015 @ 6:25 am
Many Conservatives are behind Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, who also are not Natural born citizens. If either gets elected it will serve as a justification for the Obama presidency. I wish people would stop using Obama to justify Cruz, when in reality electing Cruz will validate the Obama’s regime!
November 3rd, 2015 @ 6:58 am
Send the military to remove Obama from office.
Time to clean house.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 7:04 am
The Ninth Circus Court of Schlemiels — treasonous cowards all!
Will, where there’s a will there’s a way.
Dump the Chump and Stump for Trump.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 7:10 am
Treebird:
You are right. The main reason the other ineligible candidates are running is to validate Barry’s usurpation so it never comes back to haunt the treasonous Congress and media which aided, allowed and covered for the Obama fraud, the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 7:53 am
When Nixon resigned and Agnew vacated the VP the next one in line was Henry Kissinger. Henry was born in Germany and was not eligible to serve as President. Finally, Jerry Ford was appointed as President.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 9:22 am
There is no rule of law in the formerly great USA anymore.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 10:05 am
certainly no rule of law.
https://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-to-defy-court-forge-ahead-on-amnesty/?cat_orig=us
November 3rd, 2015 @ 10:09 am
@#27: ????
November 3rd, 2015 @ 10:59 am
Same lawlessness, but on a larger scale:
EXCLUSIVE: Obama Trade Rep Michael Froman Worked For European Commission, Farage Reveals Live On Breitbart Radio
https://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2015/11/exclusive-obama-trade-rep-michael.html
November 3rd, 2015 @ 11:04 am
Kissinger was never in line. Shows how ignorant you people are. And Turnright, the court wasn’t afraid to rule on the merits. There are none beyond some crackpot allegations for which there is no proof.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 12:13 pm
@#32: Absolutely correct. Nice to see an intelligent post here.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 1:56 pm
I am worried about this country.
1. We have (supposedly) American citizens
electing muslims to congress, knowing that
they will not or cannot support and defend
the Constitution.
2. Now we have a couple of people running
for President that had NO American citizen
parents when they were born.
3. We have one person running for President
That was born in a foreign country with a foreign
citizen father.
4. We have a admitted socialist running for
President and many are saying that they will
vote for him.
5. We have a confirmed lair running for President
and people are still saying that they will vote for
her.
6. We have a congress that will not even question
a persons eligibility for the office they are seeking.
7. We have a judicial system that “claims” that
an American citizen doesn’t have “standing” to
question a persons eligibility to hold office.
I thank God that I don’t have many more
years left on this earth to witness the destruction
of this once great country.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 3:04 pm
Trust in the Lord, Don from the great state of Oklahoma.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 4:07 pm
#32 and #33 FOAD! Scum!
November 3rd, 2015 @ 4:11 pm
Who’s to say this “court” isn’t moot?
November 3rd, 2015 @ 4:20 pm
hapnhale…. the military wont do chit cause obama has control of the military leaders.. all those who could help werer removed or resigned
i guess thats why the constitution talks about a “well armed militia” its time the citizens take action against these judges and other idiots and remove the bastard in the whitehouse and try him for treason amongst other things… and arrest hillary.. she would break to get a deal ….
will
November 3rd, 2015 @ 4:33 pm
We all thank god for the same reason, Don in Oklahoma!
November 3rd, 2015 @ 4:47 pm
Our worst nightmares will come true without a shot being fired if you leave it up to them. I say we need Guy Fawkes to get the job done. As for the communist bastards Mike and Andrew, I’m tracing you as we speak. Pray I don’t find you. That’s right communists don’t pray.
November 3rd, 2015 @ 7:13 pm
Andrew Morris, fellow Communist & devout Hussein supporter. I used to bean your kind in the face with dodgeballs in the 7th grade in P.E. and here you are later in life.
November 4th, 2015 @ 6:38 am
#32 Andrew Morris
“Kissinger was never in line. Shows how ignorant you people are. And Turnright, the court wasn’t afraid to rule on the merits. There are none beyond some crackpot allegations for which there is no proof.”
Crackpot allegations for which there is no proof? Really?
“Barack Obama was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii” — Obama’s literary agent Acton & Dystel, 1991-2007
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States (Obama and Biden) are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado.” — 2008 Democratic Party of Hawaii Official Certification of Nomination (“OCON”).
However, Hawaiian Revised Statute 11-113 (c)(1)(B) specifically requires said OCON to contain a statement explicitly stating that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.
There’s more proof but you and your ilk wouldn’t accept it as such either.
#33 Mike
“@#32: Absolutely correct. Nice to see an intelligent post here.”
Two wrongs don’t make one right.
November 4th, 2015 @ 6:44 am
Some ppl make threats about tracing ppl down. When they can’t find their way out of their own a$$.
November 4th, 2015 @ 9:08 am
Would anyone really expect anything different from the “ninth circus court”.?
November 4th, 2015 @ 9:19 am
Number 32 Andrew Morris. What the hell do you mean there is no proof that he should not be President!!! He committed more than one felony stating he was a foreign student to get a Fulbright scholarship for Occidental College and also stated he was a foreign student when he went to Columbia University. For me and thousands of others this is more than a misdemeanor and he would have been barred from every seeking office anywhere and not only for that of President!!!!
November 4th, 2015 @ 9:20 am
Number 33 “Mike”. You are as ignorant as number 32.
November 4th, 2015 @ 1:33 pm
Earl Gordon… I (and I suspect the world) would love to see that evidence. Can you enlighten us?
Keep in mind also that someone saying so is not evidence.
And if it existed that, in and of itself, would not make Obama ineligible.
November 4th, 2015 @ 2:43 pm
good one, Ben Frank, and oh so true!
November 5th, 2015 @ 12:32 am
so now whats the next step… this half breed bastard is going to get away with all his illegal activities
we need a legal grand jury as defined by law
or a militia ot afraid to act to protec the constitution from those communists
will
November 5th, 2015 @ 4:28 am
#47 Paul Jackson
“Keep in mind also that someone saying so is not evidence.
And if it existed that, in and of itself, would not make Obama ineligible.”
Obama himself saying he was born in Kenya for the 16 years immediately preceding his announcing his candidacy for POTUS and Obama’s own party in his alleged home State not saying he is eligible per the U.S. Constitution as they were required to do by Hawaii law is as close to irrefutable prima facie evidence as you can get.
Unless/until that is proven false by equal or greater irrefutable prima facie evidence, which has not yet occurred, that, in and of itself, makes Obama ineligible.
November 5th, 2015 @ 12:20 pm
Racer Jim. Neither of those are true.
Try again.
Try real evidence.
November 5th, 2015 @ 12:41 pm
It may take the Patriots of this America to actually solve this hellish, evil scenario.
Which means, either the military does its job, since it seems to be able to go all over the planet, to help every other nation, but can’t stand up and help America????!
What’s wrong with this picture? Let’s be prepared to Lock-N-Load…!
November 5th, 2015 @ 3:16 pm
Everyone should study the sad downward spiral of Obama sycophant Kathleen Kane. She will probably go to prison and has already been disbarred for her own form of treason against We the people. However it is useful to note that she is mainly being punished for issuing gay marriage licenses illegally. This is the true payback for all pedophile lovers. This is what the downfall of Obama should look like.
November 5th, 2015 @ 3:49 pm
Our courts are dis-honest. We no longer have to obey our so called laws!
November 6th, 2015 @ 1:06 am
The 3 nine circuit appellate Judges: D.W. NELSON, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, have written a decision which intentionally confuses the public about the scope of Judge England decision on the appealed lawsuit.
The 3 Judges also confuse the public on the scope their own decision on the appealed lawsuit.
The heading of 3 Judges decision:
[Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s order dismissing their claim that
President Obama is not eligible to be the President of the United States and their
claim for violation of California Penal Code § 2150. We have jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.]
1)Here is the first problem in the above heading. It is in the first conjunct of the first sentence:
[(Judge England’s) the district court’s order dismissing (plaintiff’s) claim that Mr. Obama is not eligible to be President of United States…]
Judge England has not examined the facts documented in the lawsuit. The Judge has dismissed the lawsuit in his order, because in his opinion the lawsuit should not be directed to him but rather to Congress.
Thus Judge England does not dismiss nor overturns the plaintiff’s claim of Mr. Obama ineligibility to be US President. The judge has dismissed the entire lawsuit, because in his opinion it should be directed to another federal government division- Congress
However, Judge England is mistaken: to decide the facts weather a human is eligible to be US president can be decided by any Judge.
While a Congressional committee or other Congressional conference could make this decision too, this is certainly not a necessity.
Judge England recommends the Congress to deal with the lawsuit, because he sees impeachment as a nessecery component of the decision on the lawsuit. The lawsuit focus is not impeachment, but the issue of ineligibility. Thus Judge England is wrong about directing lawsuit to the Congress.
2)The second conjunct of the first sentence is about voting laws violation in California: […and (dismissed) their ( plaintiff’s) claim for violation of California Penal Code § 2150.]
The Judge has not examined this violation as he has dismissed the whole lawsuit. However, the first sentence of the appeal Judges heading says that the Judge has dismissed the plaintiff’s claim on this violation.
Instead the Judge dismissed the whole lawsuit. The Judge has provided reasons for dismissing the lawsuit, but he has not provided any reasons for overturning lawsuit claims.
The Judge has not proved that the lawsuit claims or facts are false. The Judge’s decision summary (Order summary) is analyzed later in this text.
3)The 3 appellate Judges write [We affirm]. Affirm what?
Judge England has dismissed the lawsuit. He has not overturned any claims or facts in it. However, the 3 Judges decision reads as they affirm the dismissal of the claim of Mr. Obama ineligibility to be US President and they affirm the dismissal of the claim on voting violation in California.
This 3 Judges Decision may be read as they affirm overturning of the plaintiff’s claims in the lawsuit. The 3 Judges do not do this. This is because the 3 Judges do not examine the facts of ineligibility presented in the lawsuit. They do not examine the California voting code violation facts.
The 3 Judges dismiss the lawsuit on the basis that tries to demonstrate the lawsuit is “moot”. “Moot” is a form of irrelevancy at this time. This is because in the opinion of the 3 Judges the controversies between the plaintiffs and the defendants no longer exist.
The controversies do continue to exist, because Mr. Obama believes he is eligible and the plaintiff has provided facts showing that Mr. Obama is not eligible.
There all kinds of physical, medical, political, economic, and constitutional effects that plague the plaintiffs and most of the US population for the 7 years or more coming from treating Mr. Obama as if he is eligible to be US President.
With respect to Mr. Obama being not eligible to be US president, it is unalterable fact that holds for all future time (or if overturned does not hold until Mr. Obama lives).
The Judges refusal to make this decision on Mr. Obama eligibility is a refusal to affirm US Constitution eligibility requirements for being elected US President.
The eligibility decision cannot change with time once it is made. Claiming “mootness” is surprising for the position of the Judge England and the appellate Judges.
This is because idea of “mootness” allows the Judges to refuse to examine the facts of weather Mr. Obama is constitutionally eligible to be US President.
The appellate Judges refuse to make a decision with respect to Constitutional requirements of being eligible to be US President.
The 3 Judges refuse to enforce US Constitution by checking whether its requirements hold for Mr. Obama. The reasoning of the three Judges must be faulty.
Dr. Orly Taitz Summary of Judge England Decision on Grinols:
“Judge Englans: “However, as set forth above, federal courts cannot grant Plaintiffs the relief sought because the issues which Plaintiffs raise in their pleadings are constitutionally committed to the jurisdiction of another branch of the federal government.
If Plaintiffs believe that President Obama has violated the law, their remedy is to alert Congress to the alleged wrongdoing.
Congress could then initiate
impeachment proceedings with the aid of an independent and special prosecutor. See
U.S. Const. art. I, § 2, cl. 5; U.S. Const. art. I, § 3, cl. 6; U.S. Const. art. I, § 3, cl. 7.
Plaintiffs could also lobby Congress or the states to pass a Constitutional amendment
defining the phrase “natural born citizen” as used in Article II of the Constitution or pass
laws requiring presidential candidates to prove their citizenship before taking office. U.S.
Const. art. V.”
For now I will abbreviate the above Decision Summary as the Decision. I have no access to the full text of Judge England Decision. The Judge’s full text of the decision is likely to be longer than the decision Summary. I do not have access to that full text at present.
The decision above consists of 4 sentences. The first sentence summarizes the outcomes of the following 3 sentences.
The first sentence of the decision says that GRINOLS lawsuit should be submitted to the branch of federal government other than Federal Judiciary and therefore not to Judge England.
The reasons for this are explained in the remaining 3 sentences of the decision. Therefore, the first sentence will be shown to be false as outcomes of each of the subsequent 3 sentences will be shown not to hold.
1)Judge: “If Plaintiffs believe that President Obama has violated the law, their
remedy is to alert Congress to the alleged wrongdoing.”
The principal issue of Grinols lawsuit are associated with the fact that Mr. Obama is not eligible to be US President. As far as Constitution is concerned Mr. Obama is not the US President, despite the Supreme Court anointing him and Congress accepting the conferral of the title President on Mr. Obama after 2008 and 2012 Presidential elections.
That is Mr. Obama ineligibility to be US President fundamentally concerns Mr. Obama and not the current US president. US has no President for 7 years according to the US Constitution.
Congress may examine the issue of Mr. Obama ineligibility to be US President, but so any State Court and any Federal Court can do. The issue we are talking about is the Constitutional eligibility of a person to be a President.
A decision on this issue can be made by any court as it could be also decided by a Congressional committee. A federal Judge is certainly qualified to make a decision on the facts that constitutionally disqualify Mr. Obama to be US President. Thus there is no reasons coming from the first sentence of the decision to refuse the consideration of this lawsuit by Judge England.
2)Judge: “Congress could then initiate impeachment proceedings with the aid of an independent and special prosecutor. See U.S. Const. art. I, § 2, cl. 5; U.S. Const. art. I, § 3, cl. 6; U.S. Const. art. I, § 3, cl. 7. ”
Impeachment process does not apply to Mr. Obama, who is not a US President according to US Constitution. In other words, Congress could initiate impeachment proceedings only if it has been determined that Mr. Obama is constitutionally eligible to be US President.
The facts submitted in the lawsuit must be shown to be false in order for the impeachment process to be initiated. The content of the lawsuit does not seek impeachment.
Instead the lawsuit seeks to publicly examine Mr. Obama constitutional eligibility to be US President and see if he is eligible or not on the basis of confirming or denying the truth of the facts. Deciding the truths of the facts does not have to involve Congress. Any Judge can do that. Judge England could.
3)Judge: “Plaintiffs could also lobby Congress or the states to pass a Constitutional amendment defining the phrase “natural born citizen” as used in Article II of the Constitution or pass
laws requiring presidential candidates to prove their citizenship before taking office. U.S. Const. art. V.”
For clarification purpose inclusion explanation of [the phrase “natural born citizen”] could be helpful.
However, the history of the origin and meaning of the “natural born citizen” is well recorded. The “natural born citizen” has been used in several lawsuits.
With respect to Mr. Obama, his father was not Natural Born. Neither Constitutional Amendment nor new laws need be passed requiring presidential candidates to prove their citizenship. Mr. Obama is not eligible just because his father was not American Citizen as is required by US Constitution from a presidential candidate.
In addition, the burden of proof of eligibility is on Mr. Obama, and not of anyone else. Millions of people believe Mr. Obama is not eligible.
In effect Judge England’s decision is a decision to dismiss the lawsuit on the basis of the speculations the Judge has stated in the decision.
Thus the Judge has evaded to examine the facts presented in the lawsuit. The decision of the Judge does not imply that the facts of the plaintiffs have been overturned. These facts have been ignored and the lawsuit has been dismissed.
Judge England was not willing to examine a Constitutional eligibility of Mr. Obama to be president by examining the facts given by the plaintiffs. Judge England has refused to do his job.
Are their Federal Judges or federal Appellate Judges who would do their jobs with regards to this lawsuit?
about 4 such Judges are listed in the book The Underground Lawyer (see amazon.com), pages 67-69. There are likely to be more than that.
November 6th, 2015 @ 4:56 am
@Paul Jackson
Both of those are true.
Prove them false.
Take your best shot — you only get one.
November 6th, 2015 @ 7:43 am
Orly Taitz – to Paul Jackson – I’m ‘scratching my head’ on this one – Racer Jim’s post on “Certification for President’ – – I’m going WAY back to the supposed birth of Obama – as far as eligibility goes – “Congressional rule change for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986 puts in serious doubt Stanley Ann Dunham’s ability to confer citizenship status on her son. – Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. was born in 1961; Dunham’s age – only 18 at time of delivery. ”When one parent was a U.S. citizen and the other a foreign national, the U.S. citizen parent must have resided in the U.S. for a total of 10 years prior to birth of the child with FIVE of the years after the age of 14.” Stanley Ann Dunham did not meet requisite status” – “She was not old enough to register Obama’s birth in Hawaii or anywhere else in the U.S. as a Natural Born Citizen as she did not meet the residency requirements!” – – another put – – The rules changed again for people born between December 23, 1952, and November 13, 1986. When one parent was a U.S. citizen and the other a foreign national, the U.S. citizen parent must have resided in the U.S. for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child, with five of the years after the age of 14. Children born out of wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother were U.S. citizens if the mother was a resident in the U.S. for a period of one year prior to the birth of the child. Children born out of wedlock to a U.S. citizen father acquired U.S. citizenship only if legitimated before turning 21.
https://www.ranchodlaw.com/other-visas/citizenship-and-residency/