Sam on Bob Harden Stress and CBT

Sunday, January 4, 2009

This Coming Week in the Courts - Jan 4

This Week in the Courts
Submitted by Phil on Sun, Jan 4, 2009

For the Barack Hussein Obama presidential eligibility saga, this week presents a number of important milestones for both the Legislative and Judicial branches of the federal government as well as the great State of Washington:

Thursday, January 8, 2009: Congress meets in joint session to count the Electoral College votes; from the National Archives: “Public Law 110-430 changed the date of the electoral vote in Congress in 2009 from January 6 to January 8. This date change is effective only for the 2008 presidential election.”

Thursday, January 8, 2009: James Broe, Plaintiff pro se and one of 13 total Plaintiffs in Broe v. Reed (attorney Stephen Pidgeon representing), is scheduled to have his case heard via oral argument at the Washington State Supreme Court.

Friday, January 9, 2009: Philip J. Berg, Plaintiff in Berg v. Obama, has his case going to Supreme Court Conference, where they will privately discuss whether or not to grant a writ of Certiorari (”Rule of Four“: 4 of 9 Justices required to grant). Remember the following concerning these writs, per Wikipedia: “the legal effect of the Supreme Court’s denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari is commonly misunderstood as meaning that the Supreme Court approves the decision of a lower court. However, such a denial ‘imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case, as the bar has been told many times.’ Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70 (1995).

In particular, a denial of a writ of certiorari means that no binding precedent is created, and that the lower court’s decision is authoritative only within its region of jurisdiction.”

Furthermore, regarding the Supreme Court’s private Conference, it is a private meeting (per the link on the Conference). That means nobody knows what the discussions entail except for the Justices and the Supreme Court is not obligated in any way to issue any kind of explanation for why they choose to deny or grant writs on cases.

Other notable links include the following:
SCOTUSBlog.com: Supreme Court of the United States Blog, sponsored by Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP
2008 Term Court Orders: Official page of the Supreme Court where Orders to grant or deny writs, etc. are posted
The Two Reasons Why Obama Will Neither Publicly Speak About Where He Was Born Nor Produce His Original Birth Certificate: Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s blog (this one is a recent posting) citing a great legal perspective on the eligibility issue
Keyes v. Lingle: Case Dismissed; Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB: Forensic expert Sandra Ramsey Lines debunks the online certification (as opposed to certificate) of live birth (Dr. Polarik further comments).
Dunham v. Obama: Document Confirms Fatherhood, FactCheck.org UK-Kenyan Colonial Law: Barck Hussein Obama II’s biological parents’ divorce decree shows (1) BHO Sr. is, in fact, BHOII’s father (debunking many Internet rumors to the contrary) and (2) that 1961 UK-Kenyan colonial law does, in fact, flow to BHOII, thereby making him a British subject at birth.

A current listing of eligibility lawsuits can be found here.
-Phil

No comments: