Main Menu

Archive | Supreme Court

Run Cruz, run!

imageWhile I personally think foreign-born Ted Cruz is eligible because he was a US citizen at birth, there is certainly an argument to be made the other way. It will be interesting to see how strong the oppo­sition to Cruz is compared with the parentage-based oppo­sition to Obama.

If Cruz is a serious candidate, it would certainly be possible for a legitimate challenger for the Republican presidential nomination to bring a lawsuit (even if it were a friendly suit) claiming that Cruz was ineligible, resulting in the adjudication of the definition of “natural born citizen” by the Supreme Court. I think that would be a good thing.

The birthers have so polluted the discussion, and popular opinion is so terribly confused, something, I think, is needed to clear the air.

14

SCOTUS dumps birther lawsuit bin

Monday is trash pickup day at my house, and also today the Supreme Court announced dumping of birther lawsuits, most notably an appeal from the Supreme Court of Alabama in McInnish v. Chapman. Also denied was Rudy v. Lee (with amicus brief by Herb Titus).

CERTIORARI DENIED

H/t to gorefan.

Because of the holiday, the next pick-up will be on Tuesday.

Obama attorney answers birther suit at SCOTUS

I believe the anonymous writer at Gerbil Report™ is correct in saying that this is the first time President Obama has responded to a birther petition at the Supreme Court. For whatever reason, attorney Mark Herron, who represented the President in the Florida case of Voeltz v. Obama, has filed a brief in opposition to the petition for a writ of mandamus by Voeltz. Florida Secretary of State Kenneth W. Detzner filed a waiver of his right to respond.

This case, sometimes called Voeltz III (as it is the third one by Voeltz in Florida), was famously dismissed for lack of jurisdiction by judge Kevin J. Carroll, writing:

This Court notes that President Obama lives in the White House. He flies on Air Force One. He has appeared before Congress, delivered State of the Union addresses, and meets with Congressional leaders on a regular basis. He has appointed countless ambassadors to represent the interests of the United States throughout the world. President Obama’s recent appointment of The Honorable Mark Walker, formerly a member of this Court, has been confirmed by the United States Senate. Judge Walker has been sworn in as a United States District Court Judge and currently works at the Federal Courthouse down the Street. The Electoral College has recently done its work and elected Mr. Obama to be President once again. As this matter has come before the Court at this time of the year it seems only appropriate to paraphrase the ruling rendered by the fictional Judge Henry X. Harper from New York in open court in the classic holiday film Miracle on 34th St. “Since the United States Government declares this man to be President, this Court will not dispute it. Case dismissed.”

The Florida Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal in this case, citing lack of jurisdiction. (Here, Florida law prevents their Supreme Court from hearing an appeal of a per curiam [in the name of the court] affirming appellate decision without opinion.)

The specific relief being requested by Voeltz is:

Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court issue a writ of mandamus compelling the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida to hear to the case on the merits and issue a declaratory judgment as to the eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States.

Attorney Mark Herron responds in his brief in opposition to the petition by arguing that state courts do not have jurisdiction to adjudicate presidential eligibility, that this responsibility is “…committed under the Constitution to the electors and to Congress…” and further that an extraordinary measure such as a writ of mandamus is not justified. A writ of mandamus is an order directing someone to so something that they have an obligation to do, and is issued when no other remedy is available. Herron argues that there is no obligation whatever for the Florida court to vacate its order and try the case on the merits rather than dismissing it.

Voeltz is being represented by birther attorney Larry Klayman. Mark Herron had previously moved for sanctions against Klayman in this case.

Documents:

Klayman files appeal of obscure ruling on Alabama law to the US Supreme Court

Late as usual

In a move that left Obots open-mouthed with incomprehension, birther attorney Larry Klayman (who has never been convicted of criminal failure to pay child support), started the process of appealing his loss in McInnish v. Chapman to the US Supreme Court on June 19, reports the Supreme Court docket. Klayman moved for more time to submit his appeal. Perhaps he is hoping to get some momentum by a favorable ruling.

The McInnish case dealt with an obscure provision of Alabama law, called the “jurisdiction stripping statute,” that prevents Alabama courts from getting involved in the conduct of elections. McInnish wanted to force the Alabama Secretary of State to investigate the eligibility of presidential candidates as a duty of office. Klayman lost the case before the Alabama Supreme Court last March on a 7-2 vote, Chief Justice Roy Moore and Tom Parker dissenting.

Klayman’s timing of this request for an extension is odd. An appeal must be filed within 60 days of the judgment (28 U.S. Code § 2101) and Klayman’s motion for more time (which the statute permits) was filed precisely on the 60th day; however, the rules of the Supreme Court require that the request for an extension be filed 10 days before the deadline. Supreme Court Rule 13 (5) states:

For good cause, a Justice may extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari for a period not exceeding 60 days. An application to extend the time to file shall set out the basis for jurisdiction in this Court, identify the judgment sought to be reviewed, include a copy of the opinion and any order respecting rehearing, and set out specific reasons why an extension of time is justified. The application must be filed with the Clerk at least 10 days before the date the petition is due, except in extraordinary circumstances. The application must clearly identify each party for whom an extension is being sought, as any extension that might be granted would apply solely to the party or parties named in the application. For the time and manner of presenting the application, see Rules 21, 22, 30, and 33.2. An application to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari is not favored.

The request for an extension was not even docketed until June 25, long after the deadline. I don’t even know if it is possible for a Justice to grant an extension after the deadline has expired, and if that’s true then the extension must have been granted on the 19th, or not at all; the Supreme Court docket indicates no extension granted. It is hard to fathom a reason for this case to be considered  having "extraordinary circumstances." Klayman could have filed the request for an extension any time he wanted to. There’s certainly no new evidence in the interpretation of the Alabama jurisdiction stripping statute. The election, which is the subject of the case, is long over, making anything to do with that particular election moot.

Read more:

Paige and Vogt fail at the Supreme Court

Folks reading comments here already know that the Supreme Court published decisions today: H. Brooke Paige and Douglas Vogt came up losers. The Supreme Court will not take up their cases.

If you want to read more, check out RC’s article, “It’s a twofer at the Supreme Court.”

Update:

Apuzzo filed for a reconsideration in the Paige case. It was denied in August.

Breaking news: Dr. Conspiracy named as birth certificate forgery conspirator

Foggy just called to tell me that I have been named by Douglas Vogt as part of the Obama birth certificate forgery ring. What a hoot!

I don’t know nothin’ ’bout forgin’ no birth certificates!

— Dr. Conspiracy

The birther reporter at Newsblaze, Randy Foreman, according to Birther Report, obtained a copy of Douglas Vogt’s previous sealed affidavit most recently filed with the Supreme Court not under seal, and it names the forgers of Obama’s birth certificate. The images appear to have come from the court document itself. The affidavit names as forgers:

  • Miki Booth (not mentioned in the Birther Report article)
  • Johanna Ah’Nee
  • Kevin Davidson (me)
  • Loretta Fuddy
  • Alvin Onaka

I guess it’s natural that someone like Vogt with no forensic document examination experience would name forgers with no forgery experience. :roll:

Johanna Ah’Nee is a person born the same month as Barack Obama, who (foolishly, in my opinion) provided copies of her birth certificate through birther Miki Booth (who also had a son born in Hawaii and published a certificate) to Orly Taitz and Jerome Corsi. Corsi and Taitz both published copies in various stages of redaction, proving among other things that Mike Zullo lied about penciled race codes on Obama’s certificate, and that birthers in general were wrong about how certificates were numbered in Hawaii in 1961. Rather than make his theories fit the evidence, Vogt made the evidence fit his theories by declaring most of the August 1961 Hawaiian birth certificates including that of Booth and Ah’Nee to be forgeries. Vogt, unable to keep it in his pants under his hat, gave enough clues on birther talk radio, that it became obvious that innocent bystander Ah’Nee was his forger.

Both Fuddy (former Director of Health for the Hawaii Department of Health) and Onaka (Registrar of Vital records for the Hawaii Department of Health) were natural candidates for Vogt’s fantasies, since they verified and certified Obama’s own certificate.

I got tagged as the one who “did the research,” which is pretty silly when you think about it, since Dr. Onaka knows a thousand times more about a Hawaiian birth certificate than I do, since he has them all at his fingertips. I know something about birth certificates, having worked in the field almost all of my professional career, but I don’t have specialized knowledge about certificates in Hawaii, and could provide no help to any putative forgers of one. Absurd as it is, I predicted being named John Doe #8 last October, writing:

I wondered whether or not I could be one of the John Does in the complaint, and the best fit I could come up with is John Doe #8…

Vogt makes the claim that I agree with his certificate numbering scheme in one of my articles, where I said:

To forge Obama’s birth certificate, it would be necessary to create a fake certificate in early August of 1961, filled out to look like it came from Kapi’olani Hospital, with a fake signature from Dr. Sinclair (or an authentic one if he were the forger). Once inserted into the work flow at the State Department of Health, the certificate would have been registered, numbered, filed and reported to the newspapers just like certificates for all the rest born that month.

Vogt reads something into that statement that I never intended, that the list of work flow elements were listed in the order performed.

In another flight of fancy, Vogt writes:

After looking at [Dr. Conspiracy’s] articles and other obots (stands for “Obama Robots”) who post comments on his web site, it was obvious to me, that his web site was part of the disinformation program orchestrated by the White House through Jim Johnson a supporter of Obama and former head of Fannie Mae. [footnote to WorldNetDaily]

Predictably, Vogt zeroes in on my 2009 reconstruction of Obama’s long form and can’t figure out why I would have made such a thing. Vogt, usually so very imaginative, couldn’t guess that I was using a graphic format to present the known information about what would be found on the Obama certificate, should it ever be released. Vogt makes a big point that the “06” number in my reconstructed certificate is just like the off-baseline number in real certificates from that month, oblivious to the fact that I was just following the published Nordyke certificate, which I listed as one of my sources in the article. Vogt says that the available Nordyke certificate was too poor in quality for me to have gotten the information that way, but the Nordyke image linked in the article clearly shows the offset. Vogt notes that my 2009 reconstruction was updated in 2010, and wonders why. The answer is that I made a number of incremental improvements in the reconstruction as I learned stuff or decided things. The oldest version is found on the Wayback Machine and the newest version here. The specific changes were:

  1. Increasing the font size of the word “African” in Box 9
  2. Adding “Stanley Ann D. Obama” signature to Box 18a
  3. Changed placement and font size of “Wichita, Kansas” in block 16

imageVogt in the available portions of the affidavit, repeats nonsense previously debunked by me (here and here) and by Frank Arduini. I hesitate to say this, but Douglas Vogt is a pretty dim bulb.

Miki Booth agrees, according to this comment at Birther Report:

doug vogt is a f***ing idiot!! He’s gonna get his ass sued. My friend Johanna had nothing to do with this except to give her birth certificate to me to give to Dr. Corsi and Mike Zullo. vogt was jealous not being privy to the investigation and figured we were hiding something because we wouldn’t share with him.