It’s a conspiracy…or has rationality won out?
Click to Enlarge
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The Supreme Court has dismissed a second emergency appeal questioning Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president because he had dual British-American citizenship at birth.
The justices without comment on Monday refused to intervene in the November 4 presidential election, dismissing the claims of Cort Wrotnowski, a resident of Greenwich, Connecticut.
In his appeal, Wrotnowski claimed that because Obama’s father was a Kenyan-born British subject, the president-elect does meet the Constitution’s requirement that the president be a “natural born citizen” of the United States. Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. His mother was a U.S. citizen, born in the United States.
Many legal analysts questioned Wrotnowski’s argument.
“The law has always been understood to be, if you are born here, you’re a natural born citizen,” said Thomas Goldstein, founder of the Scotusblog.com Web site and a lawyer who has argued numerous cases before the high court. “And that is particularly true in this case, when you have a U.S. citizen parent like Barack Obama’s mother.”
A similar appeal was rejected a week ago by the high court, from a retired lawyer in New Jersey.
In another lawsuit making its way through the courts, Philip Berg of Pennsylvania alleges the president-elect was actually born in Kenya. Berg claims Hawaiian officials will not let him see Obama’s original birth certificate, although the campaign posted a copy of it online this summer, following numerous blog postings over the citizenship question. That case had previously been dismissed by lower federal courts.
The appeal rejected Monday is Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (08A469).
Source: CNN
Out Foxing Karl Rove 
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 16, 2008 at 12:10 am
Ted
SCOTUS has now prevented itself from acknowleding the question whether Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” (as distinguished from “citizen”) three times and counting: First before the Nov 4 general election and twice before the Dec 15 vote of the College of Electors. Other cases on the same question are at, or are heading to, SCOTUS. Whether SCOTUS ultimately decides if Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” only after the Electors vote, only after Congress acts on the Electors’ vote, prior to Obama’s inauguration, or only after Obama’s inauguration, SCOTUS will have to decide — or the people and/or the military will. The issue no longer is Obama. The issue is SCOTUS.
December 16, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Ned
Cort,
I am posting some discussions that originated on the http://www.obamacrimes.com website with my comment that I posted at the following location:
http://www.obamacrimes.us/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=31:open-comments&catid=1:open-comments&Itemid=3&cpage=3600#comment-9843
You and/or Donofrio may want to consider filing a Writ petition, since as per this discussion and as also confirmed by Lisa, Berg’s assistant your Writ petitions are still alive and they may also be able to help you prepare the Writ.
Jay…re: standing in SCOTUS
written by Ned, December 16, 2008
Jay,
I would like to respond to your comment regarding standing of the plaintiffs in all these cases pending before the SCOTUS. You may notice one thing about all these lawsuits, i.e. the SCOTUS has not yet denied the Writ of Certiorari petition on any of these lawsuits, due to the plaintiffs not having standing. Mr. Berg’s writ is still pending in the SCOTUS. The SCOTUS denied Leo Donofrio’s stay application that was filed pending the filing and disposition of the Writ of Certiorari, by him, but it appears that Leo has yet to file the Writ application in the court . The stay application was denied without any comment and his standing was not questioned. So, I believe, if Leo were to now submit the Writ petition, it would still stay pending until the Election process is completed with the Congress counting the Electoral College votes. After that, the Supremes will decide whether to conduct a judicial review and address all the pending Writ applications. Just my 2 cents .
BTW, Leo seems to have all but given up on his lawsuit. Can someone from this forum (maybe Phil or Lisa) contact him and point this out to him that his Writ of Certiorari is yet to be filed and is considered pending at the SCOTUS? I tried to convey this message to him via PlainsRadio, since I don’t have his contact info. Leo’s SCOTUS docket is available at the following location:
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a407.htm
Interestingly, Wrotnowski’s petition was just a stay application and was not filed pending the filing of a Writ of Cert. So, maybe he can also file a Writ, but it will probably have to be a new case. His docket is available at the following link:
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a469.htm
Can someone comment on the proper legal procedures to file the Writs for the above 2 cases?
———————————————————————————————-
Ned
written by bergs assistant, December 16, 2008
A Petition for Writ of Cert is a form of appeal and must be done within so much time. It is an extremely expensive process and has to be procedurally correct. It is not easy and most firms take 30-60 days to prepare one. They are a lot of work, a lot! The stays in both Cort’s and Donofrio’s case were not even granted review. Their theory of law was far different than ours. Not saying ours will get granted, but we sure hope so. We also have an emergency stay before Justice Kennedy so we are waiting to see what happens with that. As for our Petition for Writ of Cert, we should be calendared for conference sometime this week.
———————————————————————————————-
Ned
written by bergs assistant, December 16, 2008
To give you a better example of a Petitin for Writ of Cert, you have to file an original in odd form with 40 copies to the US Supreme Court. We spent thousands of dollars just in printing and having them bound. If Donofrio or Cort want to contact me, I would be happy to help them, but again our theory of law is far different. I can give them the process and tell them exactly how it must be put together.
December 17, 2008 at 7:28 am
Ted
Since the Supreme Court has now prevented itself from acknowledging the question of whether Barack H. Obama is or is not an Article II “natural born citizen” based on the Kenyan/British citizenship of Barack Obama’s father at the time of his birth (irrespective of whether Barack Obama is deemed a “citizen” born in Hawaii or otherwise) as a prerequisite to qualifying to serve as President of the United States under the Constitution — the Court having done so three times and counting, first before the Nov 4 general election and twice before the Dec 15 vote of the College of Electors — it would seem appropriate, if not necessary, for all Executive Branch departments and agencies to secure advance formal advice from the United States Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel as to how to respond to expected inquiries from federal employees who are pledged to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” as to whether they are governed by laws, regulations, orders and directives issued under Mr. Obama during such periods that said employees, by the weight of existing legal authority and prior to a decision by the Supreme Court, believe in good faith that Mr. Obama is not an Article II “natural born citizen”.
December 17, 2008 at 7:30 am
Ted
IF THE SUPREME COURT WON’T ACT, THIS IS AN EASY WAY TO FORCE THE ISSUE:–
Since the Supreme Court has now prevented itself from acknowledging the question of whether Barack H. Obama is or is not an Article II “natural born citizen” based on the Kenyan/British citizenship of Barack Obama’s father at the time of his birth (irrespective of whether Barack Obama is deemed a “citizen” born in Hawaii or otherwise) as a prerequisite to qualifying to serve as President of the United States under the Constitution — the Court having done so three times and counting, first before the Nov 4 general election and twice before the Dec 15 vote of the College of Electors — it would seem appropriate, if not necessary, for all Executive Branch departments and agencies to secure advance formal advice from the United States Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel as to how to respond to expected inquiries from federal employees who are pledged to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” as to whether they are governed by laws, regulations, orders and directives issued under Mr. Obama during such periods that said employees, by the weight of existing legal authority and prior to a decision by the Supreme Court, believe in good faith that Mr. Obama is not an Article II “natural born citizen”.