US Supreme Court to Conference on Obama's Presidential Eligibility

Originally posted by redhatty
We may not hear anything until Monday Morning (around 10 am EST)

Ah, bummer! I was hoping we’d hear something today If it was accepted or not.

I wonder if the decision can be appealed?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by redhatty

 

But why would a baby's secondary citizenship necessarily mean he had "loyalties" to a country he'd never been to? Especially when he became an adult and let that secondary citizenship lapse...

Well, let's think about that... What about those people who are called "sleeper agents" whose parents came over and gave birth but raised the child with a purpose in mind, for instance, possible terrorism. Not that I am saying in any way that Obama is a potential terrorist, I am NOT! But many children are born here and raised with the national and cultural beliefs of their parents, including but not limited to "anchor" babies who grow up and send large amounts of USD to their parent's home countries.

Many children born to foreign parents travel extensively in their formative years to their parents home countries, can you guarantee that a child born to foreign parents would definitely hold US interests in the front of their mind if given the power that the US President wields?

And why would a piece of paper (his mother's US naturalization papers, for example) change that? The fact that his mother became a US citizen doesn't change the fact that he was born and raised here.

Just some thoughts.

Well, considering that the Framers and Founders went by patriarchal lineage, the mother wouldn't matter at all. But for the father (and mother for that matter) becoming a properly naturalized US citizen guarantees that only the US has jurisdiction over you. IF as a Citizen, whether naturalized or natural-born, if you, while in a position of power, side with another country over the US, that can be a treasonous act.

Why would you CHOOSE to have a President that could even possibly have allegiance to another country? The Founders and Framers made one (I think they considered) simple rule in our founding document to try to ensure that conflicting allegiances would never become an issue for the person elected as President. I think they did the right thing in that.

reply to post by danx


No it cannot be appealed as there is no higher court to appeal to. The decision of the SCOTUS is final

SCOTUS accepted 2 cases today, as per the SCOTUS blog

Donofrio is not on it.

If a decision was made to reject the case, we probably won't know until Monday when that info is released.

Edit to fix HTML coding

[edit on 12/5/08 by redhatty]

reply to post by redhatty

Thank you for the updated redhatty.

I’ve also noticed this thread was just created 10 minutes ago, but the author automatically assumes Donofrio’s case was rejected.

Is it granted that since it doesn’t appear in today’s list, it was rejected? Or there could have been other reasons behind it not showing up?

Originally posted by FightLies
good post thanks for the information and no i did not know THAT HE DOSENT HAVE A LIVING GRANDMOTHER IS THAT TRUE? (wow)

(my step grandmother is still my grandmother, just wanted to make that clear)

I do think she was talking about child of the village though (roots).

do you think she was talking about being at obama's dads birth?

whats your take on the COLB and BC problem? I mean can we agree that its not the same thing and that he has not shown us his BC. (because thats my biggest problem with all of this, why can't he just show us the BC so this can go away?)

I will look into what you said..... anything eles I might not know? just asking because if I am wrong I am wrong, but I would like to know why.

Sarah Obama not being Obama's natural grandmother is important because it explains why she could say she was there at Obama senior's birth in a way that suggests she was not Obama senior's mother.

Yes, it was definitely Obama's dad she was talking about, because that's who the preceding conversation was about. Them sharing the same name complicated things, and I believe the questioning was done with the intent of creating that confusion.

I know where you're coning from re your step-grandmother. My daughter happily acknowledges 2 mothers since my ex married a woman who treats her as part of her family, and all her half-siblings are just brothers and sisters in her eyes.

With the birth certificate, Hawaii only releases the certificate of live birth these days, and that is generally referred to as a birth certificate.

Even Berg's site admits that.

This transcript is called, a "Certification of Live Birth," or COLB as I came to call it. A COLB is what Hawaii's Department of Health now issues in place of actual photocopies of the original, long-form birth certificate. The COLB is a "short form birth certificate," and when duly certified by them, can be used for all intents and purposes that a regular birth certificate would be used.

Here is where you go to order your COLB. People keep saying, "why doesn't he just spend the $10 and get his birth certificate?
But you'll notice there is no choice about what you get. You have one option only, the COLB, which Hawaii refers to as the birth certificate.

The only thing you can get on top of that is a certification that Hawaii holds the original, which is what Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino has given verbally.

Seeing as you're inquiring sincerely, I'm happy to explain anything else to you that I'm able to.

Originally posted by danx
Is it granted that since it doesn’t appear in today’s list, it was rejected? Or there could have been other reasons behind it not showing up?

I don't know It may have been rejected, they may have not finished deciding...who knows? I am watching Donofrio's Blog for an update also.

If rejected, we will definitely know on Monday

Originally posted by FightLies
This is what i didnt like about the msnbc news video.

1. I havent seen anything about worldnet daily saying obamas BC is "legit "

Actually, they did, yet they continue to report that its a fake. Here is a link to the worlnetdaily site.

A separate WND investigation into Obama's birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren't originally there.

This is one of many reasons why I don't trust worldnetdaily at all. In August, they say the COLB is real, now they say it's not. So which one is it??

[edit on 5-12-2008 by its bologna]

I found this little tidbit while scouring around for information.

Afro News

Update: Obama's Eligibility Challenged

A decision on whether the Supreme Court will grant a hearing questioning the eligibility of Barack Obama to become the 44th president of the United States because of concerns regarding his U.S. citizenship, in the case of Donofrio vs. Wells, will not be issued by the U.S. Supreme Court until Dec. 8, according to a court spokeswoman. The Donofrio case was not one of the two cases granted a hearing on Dec. 5th.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Thank you for that update BH!
I was looking everywhere for more information about it.

I really hope they hear it, and make their ruling swiftly.

Granted that even after the Supreme Court’s ruling there will still be people screaming ‘foul’ and “cover up”, but those are the ones that can never be convinced, no matter the amount of evidence.

reply to post by danx


Yeah, in my reading, I found a guy, Bedow, I believe, who, after hearing that the Supreme Court probably wasn't going to hear this case, is starting on the next lawsuit about Obama's campaign finances...

UNCONFIRMED so far, but I have a report saying CNN is reporting that Leo Donofrio's case was FORWARDED until Monday - so a decision MAY not have been made at all today - still trying to confirm this

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Like I said, 4 years of lawsuits. I guarantee it. Then, after successfully distracting him for 4 years, they'll complain that he didn't do enough.

Leo Donofrio Updated his blog the pertinent portion is

I have not been given any information on the disposition of the application at the conference today. SCOTUS did issue a miscellaneous order granting certiorari in two cases today.

The rest of their orders for today should come out on Monday. If I had to read into this, I would say it doesn’t look good, but it’s just a guess. The Public Information Office said they have no information other than what the Court published today. The full order list will be out on Monday.

I wish I could give better guidance, but I can’t.

Feel free to read it in it's entirety, if you so desire

reply to post by danx

There seems to be some heightened eagerness to know the outcome of the SC action on the Obama case as if it were not a foregone conclusion. Obama didn't ask the Congress for any affirmation as John McCain did for a reason. If his ad visors overlooked a tiny bug in it, then the Justices are going to kill it dead. There is absolutely no obstacle that would prevent Obama from moving into the White House.

I think that some folks around here can hardly wait to point out where the Justices erred.

reply to post by Irish M1ck


I think Will Rogers said it best. " If Congress and the President are rapped up in minutia they can't find the time to do any harm"!! To me, thats exactly the way I want it!

Zindo

reply to post by stander


Stander, Donofrio's case did not focus on Obama. It was against the NJ SoS for not verifying the eligibility of the candidates placed on the NJ Ballot. One candidate was born in Nicaragua, Roger Calero.

Please understand, Donofrio never disputes Obama's birth in Hawaii nor makes any comment whatsoever on Obama's birth certificate.

Out of all the cases to date, this one seemed to be the one that had real merit and might actually end up being ruled on, but right now, it isn't looking that way.

The only relief that Donofrio really requests is for a court to determine who is ultimately responsible for verifying a candidate's eligibility to run before they are placed on the Ballot, from his understanding of NJ law, the SoS of NJ is responsible and was negligent in her responsibility.

Unfortunately, as long as there are doubts about Obama's eligibility, there will be division in the nation. As much as I doubt anything will happen to prove Obama ineligible in the near future, what happens IF, and that's a big IF, someday, maybe 10 yrs from now, some piece of information comes out proving Obama never really was eligible. What happens to the standing on any laws he signs, and treaties he is part of, or even the Budgets he approved?

Can you just imagine what would happen over budgets alone?

No tax collected is valid.
No federal appropriation is valid.
No federal salary may legally be paid.
All government workers, including the armed forces, have no right to keep their pay.
In two years the ramifications of having to legally unwind all these false transactions would bankrupt the US government.
Following on from that, all bonds sold over all time would be in default.
The ripple effects would engulf and take down most of the world.

And you think our economic climate is bad now? Just imagine if all the doubters are (heaven forbid, eh?) right!

Is it so much to ask that the matter be settled decisively NOW before we have to deal with potential repercussions?

Edit to fix minor spelling error

[edit on 12/5/08 by redhatty]

reply to post by stander

I’m not sure what side of the fence you think I’m on, but I’ve stated my opinion (and even personal preferences) many many times, I’m not going to repeat them.

I think that some folks around here can hardly wait to point out where the Justices erred

Let them. They will be subject to the same substantiated arguments their other claims have been.

Obama didn't ask the Congress for any affirmation as John McCain did for a reason.

To be fair to Sen. McCain, he didn’t ask Congress for anything, and it was the Senate.

At any rate, it doesn’t really matter as it’s just a non-binding Resolution with no legal value whatsoever. So, if McCain wasn’t/isn’t a “natural born” citizen (as I’ve argued), that Resolution couldn’t make him one anyway.

i don't know if anyone has seen this from Berg's site as well.

In the afternoon, December 1, 2008, Lisa, Mr. Berg's Assistant contacted the U.S. Supreme Court and spoke with the Clerk. The Clerk informed Lisa Mr. Berg's Petition for Writ of Certiorari would be distributed to all nine (9) Justices and a conference should be set within ten (10) days. As I'm sure you are aware, during the conference the Justices will discuss Mr. Berg's Petition for the Writ of Certiorari and decide whether or not to grant or deny the Petition. It only takes four (4) out of nine (9) Justices to agree to grant Mr. Berg's Petition for Writ of Certiorari. The Justices can also make other Orders during the Conference.

Berg's site

So Bergs case will be sent to all 9 justices and a conference should take place within 10 days. so that now makes 2 Obama cases before the SCOTUS within a week of each other. Whats the chances they will hear at least one of these cases?

And i would like to inform everyone that even if they decide to hear one of these cases they DO NOT have to issue a ruling right away, they have until the adjourn for the summer to issue a ruling. So don't be supprised if they take awhile to issue a ruling if they hear either or both of these cases.

They could also combine both the current cases pertaining to Obama into one case. they have done this many times in the past. that could be why they are waiting to render a decision on Donofrio's case until monday.

Edit to add:
The date on bergs site for that announcement was dec 4th. And his assistant called the SCOTUS Clerk on the 1st and Obama hadn't responded yet. The SCOTUS allows defendants to respond by mail and they give an extra 7 days for mail. But the response has to be postmarked in this case dec 1. the 7 days is up on the 8th which is monday. the same day the decision on Donofrio's case is suppose to be released. Makes you wonder what the SCOTUS is going to do with these 2 cases

[edit on 12/5/2008 by Mercenary2007]

Originally posted by Mercenary2007
i don't know if anyone has seen this from Berg's site as well. (...)

So Bergs case will be sent to all 9 justices and a conference should take place within 10 days. so that now makes 2 Obama cases before the SCOTUS within a week of each other. Whats the chances they will hear at least one of these cases?

I wouldn’t put much faith in Berg’s case, his arguments are so flawed, that the laws he cites to help prove his point actually contradict and invalidate all his claims. I looked into it a few days ago.

Leo Donofrio’s case on the other hand, although I still believe he’s wrong regarding Obama, has some merit, and I believe the SCOTUS should hear it.

I doubt the SCOTUS would accept to hear more than one case regarding this issue, though. If I had to bet on which of those currently filed the SCOTUS would choose to hear, I would have to say Donofrio’s.

There’s a strong possibility that the SCOTUS won’t hear it though, as it is stated in this analysis:

Even assuming his claim had merit, it likely falls outside the field of SCOTUS’ appellate review, as it derives from state law, making his defeat at the New Jersey Supreme Court final.

edit: I guess there’s always the possibility that a proper lawsuit with merit will come along in the future. I would like to see this settled sooner than later, though.




[edit on 5-12-2008 by danx]