I am barely believing what I am reading. The transcript is now available for the October 5 hearing in Barnett v. Obama (see full copy at bottom). I cracked up and just had to stop on this one.
Orly Taitz is answering the Court’s question about standing, and specifically she is being asked what particular harm has befallen her inactive military plaintiffs because Barack Obama is President. Orly cited the most famous lawsuit in our nation’s history, Brown v. Board of Education. Brown, an African American, sued the Board of Education of Topeka Kansas, arguing that school segregation based on race was a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Using this example and applying it to her plaintiffs, Taitz said:
When the plaintiffs bring cases such as cases of establishment clause, separation of state — of religion and state, when the Supreme Court have already decided Brown v. Board of Education and Clark v. USA, what was the specific harm to the members of the Board of Education when they brought this lawsuit? Nobody was standing with a bat ready to hit them. Nobody was telling them you have to go to Iran. Nobody was killing them. But yet they brought this case. (Page 30)
I find it hard to believe that someone who passed the 5th grade (and was paying attention) doesn’t know who sued whom in Brown v Board of Education.
But the stupid: it’s contagious!
Following this faux pas, co-counsel Gary Kreep also became confused as here:
We thought that — we thought that a lot of the plaintiffs — strike that — a lot of the defendants there shouldn’t have been in there.
But the infection was not restricted just to the defense counsel. Judge Carter himself was not immune:
THE COURT: Which defendants have standing?
MR. KREEP: Which defendants have standing?
THE COURT: I’m sorry. Which plaintiffs have standing?