Here’s a screen shot in case this particular post [link to Taitz web site] from the Taitz web site gets scrubbed:
The Court decision doesn’t say that the respondent must “cover” costs, but rather that the respondent may “recover” costs, i.e., Orly pays.
In this action, the respondents did not file any responses, leading one to think that they will not have much in the way of costs to recover.
The article on the Taitz site is gone this morning. I think the importance of retaining my article is not to leave a monument to how clueless Orly Taitz is, but rather to give a possible example of the kind of error she makes that contributes to her being the conspiracy theorist she is—the lack of a high-functioning nonsense filter. Orly Taitz expressed surprise that she should lose her case and the other side have to pay costs—recognizing something that makes no sense whatever; nevertheless, the way her mind works, that recognition of nonsense was not strong enough to effect a change in behavior and to prevent an embarrassing mistake.