Leo Donofrio: “SCOTUS = WUSSY”
Leo Donofrio, Plaintiff in Donofrio v. Wells, posted his thoughts today on specific cases presented in Cort Wrotnowski’s case, Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz and how Leo feels that the Supreme Court completely fumbled in their responsibilities to uphold the Constitution (full comment is below).
While I very much appreciate Leo spearheading most of the efforts of getting at least 2 cases before the Supreme Court in Conference, I’m going to have to agree to disagree with him on the conclusion he draws from the Justices denying a hearing on either case.
Specifically, I think it’s safe to say that since it’s not unconstitutional for the Electoral College to vote on its federally-prescribed date (and there’s nothing wrong, per se, with the Electoral College actually voting for someone who is not eligible to be President), the Supreme Court was certainly not going to “stay” it from happening. After all, the Electoral College is an aspect of the Legislative branch and is supposed to be voting on the President.
Not only this, but we have to remember that the Electoral College’s vote means nothing until such time as Congress convenes to (1) count the votes and (2) certify that those votes are legitimate; and there’s the rub. At this point in the electoral process, Congress is the last firewall, if you will, of ensuring that the entire electoral process, to date, has been executed (1) fairly and (2) legitimately. This means it is Congress’ responsibility to ensure that the US Constitution is followed with respect to the President-elect.
So, did the Supreme Court appropriately deny stays of the Electoral College, likely because the Legislative branch hasn’t yet exhausted all of its duties? I say yes. However, could a case be made that, should Congress certify an ineligible President-elect as President, the Supreme Court ought to be called in to hold Congress accountable? Absolutely!
And, for me, that’s the likely path I see at this time.
-Phil
SCOTUS IN “WONG KIM ARK” AND “MINOR V. HAPPERSETT” RIGHTFULLY PUNTED ON “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” – CURRENT COURT PURPOSELY FUMBLED
They fumbled on purpose because they were afraid to run with the ball and get hit.
I get more questions about United States v. Wong Kim Ark than any other case. Recently, Steve Marquis wrote to me and asked for a clarification about this. Steve is the person who first sued the Washington Secretary of State back in October. I was inspired by Steve’s action to file my own suit.
I now find this all irrelevant since if the court was ever going to uphold the Constitution, it would have done so by now on this issue. As I’ve stated in comments to my last blog (which was satire people), you have no Constitution and you have no “Supreme” court. You have a filthy corrupted snake pit which tried to protect itself from responsibility for this issue by using clerks like brutal praetorian guards.
But, out of respect for Steve’s effort and the overall confusion this case has caused on the natural born citizen issue, I’ve written the following explanation thereto in the hope that the current court will receive no historical cover from Wong Kim Ark as none is due.
In Wong Kim Ark, the court thoroughly discussed “natural born citizen”. And in doing so, Justice Gray quoted directly from the holding in a prior Supreme Court case, Minor v. Happersett. The following passage is a quote from Minor as quoted by Justice Gray in Wong Kim Ark:
” ‘At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens.’ Minor v. Happersett (1874) 21 Wall. 162, 166-168.”
(Emphasis added.)
Look at that, you have Justice Gray citing the court in Minor who are themselves citing the “Laws of Nations” definition (they didn’t directly cite that treatise but the definition used is taken therefrom) of natural born citizen = person born in US to “citizen parents” = nbc .
In Minor, they clearly established who was a “natural born citizen” beyond any doubt, a definition that does not include Obama. As to persons born in the US to foreign parents they said, as directly quoted in Wong Kim Ark by Justice Gray, “As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.“
For the purposes of Minor and Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court didn’t need to reach the “natural born citizen” issue as neither person was running for President, so they rightfully punted by limiting their holdings to the issue of whether each person was a “citizen”.
But they discussed the “natural born citizen” issue thoroughly. Justice Gray in Wong Kim Ark quoted this EXACT passage from Minor. And in doing so, Justice Gray and the court punted on whether Wong Kim Arkwas a “natural born citizen” specifically limiting their holding to state that the person was a “citizen”.
There’s a clear distinction being made by both the Minor court and theWong Kim Ark court between “natural born citizens” and “citizens”. And both holdings were willing to say that the person was a “Citizen” but no more than that. They carefully evaded the issue of whether a person born in the US to parents who weren’t citizens was a “natural born citizen”.
Justice Gray covered all of this ground in Wong Kim Ark thoroughly, but at the end of the decision he refused to state that a person born in the US to foreign parents was a “natural born citizen”. In Wong Kim Ark, the court’s holding avoided the natural born citizen issue by steering widely clear of it in the conclusion. Won Kim Ark wasn’t running for President, so they punted as follows:
“The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties, were to present for determination the single question, stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative. ” (Emphasis added.)
They held that Wong Kim Ark was a “citizen” but they did not hold that he was a “natural born citizen”. And Justice Gray thoroughly discussed the definition of “natural born citizen” in his review of the Minor case wherein the Supreme Court in Minor adopted the Laws of Nationsdefinition of “natural born citizen” as being the only definition which is free of doubt.
I have stated over and again that the Wong Kim Ark decision supports the argument that Obama is not a natural born citizen in that the court clearly had the chance in the Wong Kim Ark opinion to define “natural born citizen” as being inclusive of persons born in the United States to foreign parents… but they didn’t.
And so, as is so very clearly established by the supreme court in Minorand Wong Kim Ark, there are now, and have always been, doubts about whether people born in the US to foreign parents are “natural born citizens”.
Those doubts needed to be discussed and adjudicated by the current supreme court. But they didn’t have the right stuff to take the issue on. And that makes them neither supreme nor even willing to live up to their oath of office to uphold the Constitution.
Shame on them. Shame on this court who lacked the courage to do their job by taking on this tough issue and and having it out in open court. Not one of them had the decency to at least issue an opinion to the nation as to why the applications were denied.
Instead of respecting the citizens who took time, money and risk to bring these actions, those citizens were subjected to the most bizarre clerical behavior this lawyer of seventeen years has ever seen or could ever imagine.
This current supreme court is a blasphemy to justice. They have no honor. They disgust me in every fiber of my being, a sick joke to a sick country in their silly robes and ruffles.
Word up. And that word is stamped on their foreheads forever (see image above).
Thank you, Arlen. I’m keeping an open mind.
The Alsup decision referred to above is written, excerpted about here:
http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/2008/12/is-judicial-review-allowed-only-after.html
Title: “Is the Judicial Review Allowed Only After the Electoral College Vote and Congressional Certification?”
Notice the point that courts have previously seen to it that third party candidate(s) were removed — but not McCain, nor Obama. Operative term, “bipartisan combine?”
Washington warned us about the encroaching powers of political parties.
And, about that Alsup decision, the more I reflect upon it, the more it looks like he is passing the buck — much like the state Secretaries of State and state courts have been passing the buck, precedent or not.
Kris, this “layman” can hardly say that is not what “pending” means, here. Virtually, a “miscellaneous” category?
SCOTUS order lists for Donofrio, Wrotnowski:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/courtorders/120808zor.pdf
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/courtorders/121508zor.pdf
Okay, don’t mean to play the devil’s advocate here since I too would like to be on the hope-filled side, but it could appear that orders on pending cases just means that those cases were pending beforehand – before the order was finally given. With all the speculation that seems to have to take place in lieu of authoritative/experienced knowledge out here, SCOTUS is beginning to appear like the illuminati or some other kind of mysteriously closed society! Someone write to Judge Bork and get his take on what HAS taken place and what could possibly STILL take place!!
…is “Is…
Sorry, didn’t mean to go Clintonian.
Kris,
On the SCOTUS website, click on Orders and Journals, October 2008 Session,the the dates Dec. 8th and Dec. 15th.
If you do a search just from the Docket, it just says Denied. From the Orders and Journals link, it lists the cases under Cases Pending. It’s kinda confusing. I agree with Phil’s comments on the status and the reasoning he offers for how SCOTUS may be thinking. Sure hope he’s right! This is the best site I’ve seen on updates and information.
DONOFRIO/WROTNOWSKI IS NOT DEAD — IT IS AIRTIGHT – THE SUPREMES KNOW IT BUT ARE AFRAID TO ACT — SO THE EXECUTIVE AND/OR THE PEOPLE WILL DO SO — EASY WAY TO MAKE SURE OBAMA NEVER GETS INAUGURATED — HERE’S HOW (READ CAREFULLY):–
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 at least 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”.
Rob,
Just a point of information. In 1955 our family went to Germany(my father was in the army and stationed there) when I was 8 and my brother was 9. My mother, brother and myself are on the same passport, I still have it. Was BHO on his mother’s passport? Why did she apply for a passport in 1962? I’m starting to sound like the CIA so I’ll shut up.
Eric
Rob,
Informative article. How do you know the SC has a copy of BHO’s birth certificate and his mother’s passport application?
Or are you just guessing?
Eric
Kris,
As far as I know, the “pending” state is a matter of logical deduction; nothing else outside of their respective dockets would be considered official.
-Phil
Would someone please give me the link to where it appears that Leo’s and Cort’s filings are still pending after being denied? I don’t see that on their particular dockets.
All the cases still live and the Supreme Court is timing the release of rulings.
Leo, Cort and Phil will have their day in court when a flawed election process has run the course and Obama is the President elect.
The Justices would not want to go down in history as “The Grinch That Stole Christmas”, with such a fragile economy facing the country.
Preparations by the Government need to be made for Security and Safety of the population if a ruling effects the votes of so many Americans. January can be a bitterly cold month that might keep people at home rather than spilling into the streets to riot.
If you look at Phil’s case it has been treated the same as Leo’s and Cort’s cases before the court. Emergency Requests/Motions need to be ruled on in a timely manner, but the meat of the cases still live on in the Court.
If the Justices were to tip their hand too early there would be a cloud over any ruling they would issue. 0nce the Congress votes the Supreme Court can rule since the flawed process is complete.
The Supreme Court already has a copy of Obama’s birth certificate filed with the passport application when his mother applied for his passport in 1962. The government can share this information within the government, just not outside. Everyone who applies for government services for security clearances, naturalization or passport services signs a release of information to the government. The Freedom of Information Act of 1974 only applies to that information released outside of the Federal Government.
Be patient folks, the SC is holding a straight flush Ace high.
…we shall surely all hang separately” — Benjamin Franklin (if I’m not mistaken)
-Phil
I agree with Kris. I would be prone to agree with Patriot, but for the necessary fact of the jurisdiction of federal courts in this matter.
If you click http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com you may find the text of the September federal court decision (not recalling the name of the Judge at the moment and I’m blocked from getting into my own blog because it contains a civil word or two that are blocked from the system I am using). The title of that piece is “Is the Judicial Review Allowed Only After the Electoral College Vote and Congressional Certification?”
Yes, Patriot is government’s duty to assure valid candidates, but where the Constitution already describes a power of the federal Legislative branch to oversee this, it is critical for the SCOTUS not to intervene. (That is utterly different than Bush v. Gore, in which the SCOTUS took measures after-the-fact, to reverse the Florida’s Supreme Court’s decision to do just what the SCOTUS has thusfar refused to do: to intervene when jurisdiction is constitutionally that of other branches of government.)
What America’s constitutional republic drastically needs now, is for at least one senator and at least one representative of Congress to object to the Certification of BHO II. Also, any real patriots in Congress between now and January 8, must prepare a petition for injunction and review (certiorari) in the likely case that, after each house of Congress meets/caucuses on the subject, if Obama is certified.
I believe it is no mere happenstance that the Berg case is to be heard on January 9! I also believe there may be some intention behind the Donofrio v. Wells case being labled “pending,” despite its appeal for injunction being denied.
Pending is the word — pending until after the events of January 8.
Instead of licking wounds, our very highly esteemed friend of the republic, Mr. Donofrio and his colleagues of Washington, California, Pennsylvania, etc., etc. should be all about the question of how to take a case (already existing or otherwise) to the Supreme Court, in the event that at least two competent patriots are not found in our U.S. Congress.
If we do not hang together….
For the argument above, I cite the due process rights clause: if one has the right to vote, then one has the right to vote for eligible candidates, ergo, the SOSs have the duty to see that the ballot contains eligible candidates and cannot omit this duty in any race in which the States by law or constitution allow their citizens to vote. Otherwise you have lack of due process and equality before the law, because you entice some voters by means of fraud to vote for canididates they never would have voted for.
It is indisputably unconstitutional to allow the SOS of states to admit ineligible candidates for the purpose of defauding the voters of their rights granted to them by state law of participating in the apportionment of the electoral votes held by the states.
To allow such an fruadulently apportioned Electoral college to vote, is fraud.
To allow fraud in a national election, is far worse than to put yourself forward for a national office, even though you know your are not qualified. Because those who hold office that requires them to uphold the constitution or vet candidates on the ballots in all races, have a greater duty than any private citizen.
No, Leo is correct, it is a dishonorable court!
Yes, Phil, I agree with you and have been suggesting that those who will be harmed by Congress finally certifying this man as having been eligible for all citizens to consider for electable as POTUS should be planning now for new cases. I would think that those who also were on the ballot as well as military representatives – esp. the retired (who can be called up for duty and still eligible) who now can more readily speak out, over the active duty, should be hopefully planning new cases, under the Constitution. They have been and will continue to be effected/harmed – in their very lives. And if Congress does not carry out any reasonable examination of all of the facts – those known as well as yet unknown – AFTER they will have been alerted by their own citizens whom they represent re: citizens’ doubts re: eligibility, then they should be held out by the citizens of their individual states for notice of dereliction of duty in their oaths of office.
In the letters written to the Senators and Representatives about objecting on Jan 8-use some of Leos great work above as a reference to refute the “hes got a birth certificate so hes qualified”argument that we’ve been getting in the responses.
Phil,
I agree with you and have been saying on this site and others for quite some time that SCOTUS had no consitutional authority to stay the electoral vote. Still feel that way.
I also beleive SCOTUS has no constitutional authority to stay the Congressional process of 1/8/09. Same reason as in the above. Congress is granted this authority by the Constitution and the meeting and subsuquent vote by the Congress is granted to them and only them.
I think its too early to say SCOTUS has punted. If they deny Berg and any others, without comment, on or after 1/9/09, then we can say they punted.
Also, I hope these cases don’t ramble on about things that are not related to Article II, Natural Born Citizen. All of the other issues, like what his grandmother said, Indonesia, etc, etc have nothing to do with a natural born citizen. You are natural born at birth or you are not. He disclosed his citizen status on his web site, he is not hiding anything. Born in Hawaii, mother a citzen, father not a citizen. The only issue is, will the Supreme Court will make a ruling on that.
The issue of him not even being a citizen at this time, ie he is still an Indonesian citizen, is a seperate issue. That will require producing a lot of documentation that is not public at this time.
Aslo the issue of his birth certificate showing his father as Frank Davis, is also a seperate issue. He would then be a natural born citizen but would open up the flood gates of fraud, etc. If his father was Frank Davis and he discloses that, I firmly beleive he can weather the storm and stay in office. Even if he is convicted in court of “high crimes”, that by itself does not remove him from office. They only way he can be removed from office is by impeachment and that “ain’t going to happen”. The dems will circle the wagons, sing in perfect harmony, “that doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment” and go about their merry way.
One man’s opinion.
Eric
Liberty,
Thanks for the comment.
Remember that the Supreme Court never acts on its own (that would be a type of “legislating from the bench”). Rather, a case must be brought before it such that they are willing and able to hear it. It won’t happen automatically.
-Phil
Phil,
Thanks for posting your insight. Your words keep my hope alive that the Supreme Court will act at the proper time.
It is in my opinion very unprofessional to have a picture of the Supreme Court Justices with the word wussy stamped across it. It doesn’t send a good message about the character of the person that does thing kind of thing. I’m not saying that Leo doesn’t have good character, however, if you associate your name with Jr. High type antics, well……
I believe that God in His own timing will work this out according to His will. I know others may disagree with this statement but it is what I believe. I won’t pretend to understand why God allowed this to happen in the first place but it did.
This isn’t over by any means. And in the meantime I will continue to pray and keep the faith.
God Bless you,
Liberty