I wrote before that Orly Taitz had filed too many cases to prosecute all by herself. Perhaps she’s realized that, or has some other less-rational motive, in her latest move in Mississippi.
Taitz is asking federal judge Henry T. Wingate as to the possibility of consolidating her case in Mississippi, Taitz v. Democratic Party of Mississippi, with her case in California, Judd et al v. Obama et al. As Taitz says (admits?) in her letter to the judge, the cases are pretty much the same thing. Taitz argues “judicial economy.” The first option she presents is for Judge Wingate to grant her pro hac vice (permission to represent defendants in Mississippi, where she is not licensed to practice law) and transfer the California case to Mississippi, or alternately transfer the case to California. There’s a down side to each: In Mississippi she will have to file a complex Federal RICO questionnaire. In California she will have to face Judge Carter who has already ruled against her in another similar case. To quote Mr. Bryant:
I’m not a lawyer, and so I’m not really supposed to understand whether any of this makes legal sense under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 (my citation). If I am patient, some nice federal judge will explain it to me and Orly Taitz. As a layman I say fewer cases would seem better; however, it’s abundantly clear that whatever Taitz’ real intentions, the real-world result will be delay far past the November elections that are just a month away, since the courts now have to process and hold hearings on the transfer motion. Taitz’ letter to Wingate might be just a delaying tactic to postpone filing the RICO questionnaire, since Wingate is not the one who decides who will hear the consolidated case in the first place, and he can’t rule on pro hac vice for Taitz before there is a case and motions made and answered. One might suppose that the Defendant Mississippi Secretary of State would object to the case being consolidated and tried in California. Likewise the California defendants might object to having to defend in Mississippi. Certainly her moving, removing and transferring is causing massive extra work for defendants.
It appears that someone scanned page 2 of her filing from the back, leaving it illegible. This probably helps her overall.
Update: Taitz has now filed notices indicating that she is consolidating the cases. As of this moment, they have not yet appeared on the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation docket.