Taitz has been filing lawsuits against President Obama for a little over 4 years now. I observed back in June of 2009 that Orly Taitz had misrepresented when an attempt was made to serve President Obama in the case of Keyes v. Obama. In this case, Orly relied on an inept volunteer who served a male mail clerk somewhere, and claimed that Obama was served in his personal capacity on January 20 (Inauguration Day) when in fact when the actual affidavit was filed, the date was February 10. In fact, I made several comments on the blog that year that the clock was ticking and that her case would be dismissed for missing the deadline to serve the complaint. And in fact, she did miss the deadline, but Judge Carter allowed more time and personally ordered Taitz and the US Attorney to work out the service then and there.
A 5th grader, even though not a law school graduate, should be smart enough to learn from a mistake. Apparently not in the case of Taitz. Once again, in the case of Grinols v. Electoral College, she tried to serve President Obama in his personal capacity, and when he didn’t respond, she moved for a default judgment. But in fact, it was the same story as in Keyes repeated 4 years later. Taitz told the Court in a January 3 hearing that President Obama had been served in his personal capacity, when in fact service was attempted the following day, and that service again was through the US Government, and not in Obama’s personal capacity. Her motion for default was, of course, dismissed along with another tutorial on the rules of service. Until a plaintiff is served, the Court has no jurisdiction.
I will not belabor the point with other examples of Taitz’ repeated legal errors.
So we are left with two alternative theories:
- Orly Taitz is not smarter than a 5th grader, and that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are hopelessly beyond her grasp, even when meticulously explained to her in simple terms by a judge.
- Orly Taitz makes mistakes in her legal process in order that her cases be dismissed for technical reasons, to avoid her losing on the merits. By filing cases and never losing1, she can maintain the fiction on her web site that she is fighting Obama, when in fact she has no case.
1Technically, Taitz did lose one case on the merits, Farrar v. Obama in Georgia. On appeal before the Superior Court in Georgia, Obama attorney Michael Jablonski argued that service had not been effected on President Obama in that case either.