Berg v. Obama, Lightfoot v. Bowen, Brockhausen v. Andrade: Decisions and Hearings
The 1st Amendment of the Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. [emphases mine]
Regardless of what any Supreme Court Justice, President, Representative or Senator does or says, we see a “beyond the shadow of a doubt” guarantee that no law in America shall keep the concerned citizen from being able to petition a case in which they have reason to believe that the same government — tasked with upholding all tenets of this document — is overlooking even the smallest part thereof. In the case of the President-Elect’s eligibility, the question of his credentials is always an open one; if by no other grouping of citizens, then certainly by we, the People.
I have heard much opposition on this blog and many other places across the blogosphere and in the media (where it’s actually a consideration) that the mere questioning of a politician’s eligibility for the office of the presidency is met with rank disdain, in almost taboo fashion. I have to wonder: what’s the fear in asking questions? Is this not a classically liberal proposition? Are we not all to hold those who govern us accountable to — at the very least — the basic, fundamental document that is our highest law of the land? To wit…
We await judicial action on the following dates:
- Wednesday, January 21: The Supreme Court is set to release its disposition of Berg v. Obama, whereby the Justices will decide whether or not to grant one of two types of injunctions against the Electoral College. The results are expected around 10am ET on the Supreme Court Orders page.
- Thursday, January 22: The 368th Judicial District Court in Texas is expected to hear Brockhausen v. Andrade, where Plaintiff pro se Jody Brockhausen, among other things, asks the Court for various paperwork confirming the President-Elect’s eligibility.
- Friday, January 23: Dr. Orly Taitz‘ case, Lightfoot v. Bowen, goes to Conference, essentially asking the Justices for an emergency stay to keep California’s Electoral College Electors from voting. If the Justices make a decision on this day, the Orders would likely be released between 2 and 3pm ET. This is the first case to reach the Supreme Court where the Plaintiffs include an Elector and a candidate for the vice presidency; theoretically, these two classes of citizens could overcome the standing hurdle.
Other noteworthy links include the following:
- Congratulations to Dr. Orly Taitz for becoming both a member of the Bar and an officer of the United States Supreme Court.
- Excellent letter to the editor of the Washington Times questioning (gasp!) the President-Elect’s eligibility.
- UbiReVera blog similarly believes eligibility is certainly not a frivolous issue.
- As RedState points out, isn’t the incoming Administration at least going to vet its inaugural religious leader invite list for Ingrid Mattson, who is suspected of ties to Hamas?
- Maybe you, too, can get free LASIK surgery if you’re similarly named, “Barack Hussein Obama!” It’ll require a birth certificate though!
34 responses to Berg v. Obama, Lightfoot v. Bowen, Brockhausen v. Andrade: Decisions and Hearings