Supreme Court gives Obama 'till Dec 1 to produce birth certificate

[Zenos]

I can't find anything about this in the MSM.

http://therightperspective.com/wordpress/?p=311

Docket:
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm

[Cernunnos]

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/index...d=576361&rfi=8

corroborated here

[yankee jane]

From Berg's website http://www.obamacrimes.com/. It isn't clear what Obongo's side has to provide in their answer.

U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO
BERG'S WRIT OF CERTIORARI
FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS
(Contact information and PDF at end)

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 11/07/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.

Mr. Berg remarked today, “I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama's response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States.”

Mr. Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. Mr. Berg filed a Writ of Certiorari for review of the case and an injunction to stay the election pending review. Justice Souter denied the injunction. It is expected that the Court will decide whether or not to review Berg v. Obama after the Defendants file their response, and Mr. Berg has replied to the Defendant’s response.

The Defendants' response is due by December 1st and Mr. Berg's reply will be submitted thereafter.

This is certainly hopeful

At that time, Obama must present an authentic birth certificate to the Court, which has been sealed by Hawaii governor Linda Lingle. Berg will get to respond afterwards.

Failure to do that will surely inspire the skepticism of the Justices in Obama, who are not used to being defied. The Court will have to decide what to do about a president-elect who refuses to prove his natural-born citizenship.

“I can see a unanimous Court (en banc) decertifying the election if Obama refuses to produce his birth certificate,” says attorney and writer Raymond S. Kraft. “They cannot do otherwise without abandoning all credibility as guardians of the Constitution. Even the most liberal justices, however loathe they may to do this, still consider themselves guardians of the Constitution. The Court is very jealous of its power - even over presidents, even over presidents-elect.”

And some interesting comments (if a bit out of touch with reality - "revolt", is he serious?, courts following laws - is he serious?):

Pete Jefferson
November 9th, 2008 - 5:50 pm The Supremes have issued an order because they want that birth certificate as part of their response to the writ of certiorari. If they don’t get it, then cert might well be granted, and *then* it would go to a hearing.

And they don’t have to decertify the entire election. They might, however, dictate that the Electoral Collegians cannot mark any of their ballots for Barack Obama and must mark their ballots for someone else as President. And this would pretty much “unbind” them from having to vote for the named candidate on the November ballot.

I’m not saying that John McCain would win by default. I am saying that this would create quite an interesting situation, to be sure.

Anonymous
November 9th, 2008 - 5:55 pm In light of Obama’s refusal to provide his birth certificate to the court in answer to Berg’s lawsuit; if it turns out that Obama is not a natural born citizen as defined by the constitution, then one can only conclude that his intention all along was to create a constitutional crisis, forcing the Supreme Court to decide between overturning Section I Article II of the constitution, or unseating a popularly elected President - either of which would undermine the very fabric of our constitutional form of government.

If he’s not a natural born citizen and they overturn Section I Article II, half the country will revolt because the SCOTUS ignored the constitution.

If he’s not a natural born citizen and they unseat him according to the constitution, half the country will revolt because the man they chose as President will be removed by the courts.

That is a no-win situation, and reeks of totalitarian divide-and-conquer.

I pray, quite earnestly, that Barack Hussein Obama is indeed a natural born citizen of the United States of America, and that he has the documentation to prove it.

kreatre2008
November 9th, 2008 - 11:17 pm To “Anonymous”…

The Supreme Court can’t overturn Article II, Section 1. It’s not in their authority to re-write or overturn a provision of the Constitution. If Obama proves to be ineligible, they should decertify the election. It’s as simple as that. Of course, we’ll have rioting in the streets because most people in this country don’t understand that we live in a democratic republic which is governed by rule of law — NOT by direct rule of the people. The law must prevail or else, it gives way to tyranny and mob rule. Therefore, the Supreme Court must decertify the election of Obama and instruct the electors to select someone else. We cannot ignore the Constitution. Doing so takes us down a dangerous road that will eventually end with the destruction of our Constitution and with it, our civil liberties. Government would then be able to do whatever it wants with no limits to its power.

[vladmir]

They should be able to cook one up by then,.....no problem,....hell its not as if they are trying to counterfeit money, its just a piece of paper. Grease a few palms and POOF! it appears!

[notmenomore]

I haven't really seen anything that assures me that a sealed birth certificcate is required in the response:

Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.

Perhaps one of our lawyers can speak to this, but I would imagine that a "response to the Writ" may amount to little more than an "answer:" the entry of appearance by counsel, denial of the petitioner's claim generally, and support by respondents for the District Court's ruling.

Remember, the issue is one of standing. SCOTUS can remand for further hearing; it cannot take evidence on its own. This would be the province of the trial court.

[KMRATHELL]

You would think one of the main line Jew media would have picked up this story. But even if true, my take on the Presidential succession laws is that if for some reason the President-elect's eligibility is in doubt the V.P.elect becomes acting President until everything is sorted out. That leaves us with bullshitting Joe, a White zombie controlled by Jews. So there really isn't any good news here except a nigger won't be President. Of course I would expect massive nigger rioting if the Supreme Court ruled against Obama, a very remote possibility in my opinion.

[Metal Warrior]

Originally Posted by KMRATHELL

You would think one of the main line Jew media would have picked up this story. But even if true, my take on the Presidential succession laws is that if for some reason the President-elect's eligibility is in doubt the V.P.elect becomes acting President until everything is sorted out. That leaves us with bullshitting Joe, a White zombie controlled by Jews. So there really isn't any good news here except a nigger won't be President. Of course I would expect massive nigger rioting if the Supreme Court ruled against Obama, a very remote possibility in my opinion.

I agree, the jewsmedia has held this story underwater for many weeks (even though the suit comes from a Democrat member of their Tribe), so a real challenge to the Magic Negro will never see the light of day. The people who actually run this country want this guy in office, else it would have been streaming frantically across every televitz screen since Day One.

[Zenos]

I don't understand why he doesn't just show his birth certificate? Why make it go to court? I had to show my birth certificate to get a hunting license.

His reluctance to show it makes me suspect something is fishy here.

Another thing, if the president gained the White House through deception, doesn't that make the entire ticket fraudulent? Would the Presidency then go to McCain? Or would the decision then be left to congress?

[KMRATHELL]

Originally Posted by Zenos

I don't understand why he doesn't just show his birth certificate? Why make it go to court? I had to show my birth certificate to get a hunting license.

His reluctance to show it makes me suspect something is fishy here.

Another thing, if the president gained the White House through deception, doesn't that make the entire ticket fraudulent? Would the Presidency then go to McCain? Or would the decision then be left to congress?

I think the 20th amendment is clear about the VP succeeding, presuming he is eligible. If that happened can you imagine Pelosi being a heart beat away from the Presidency?

[odin]

Originally Posted by Zenos

Another thing, if the president gained the White House through deception, doesn't that make the entire ticket fraudulent? Would the Presidency then go to McCain? Or would the decision then be left to congress?

As previously quoted, if the supremes void obama's candidacy, the electoral college will not be able to vote for obama. They will have to select from one of the other candidates that were on ticket in their state. Biden was not a presidential candidate, and can't be an option.

[odin]

BTW - obama has not yet been elected president. The November elections merely determine which candidate gets to send their hand-picked electors to the electoral college. The electors are under no obligation to vote for that candidate. The electoral college vote determines the presidency. And that vote doesn't take place until December. Therefore, Biden is not yet the VP and has no right of succession if obama's candidacy is voided.

[KMRATHELL]

Except in Michigan, electors can vote for anyone who is eligible. Michigan simply cancels their vote if they vote for someone they are not pledged for. There are nominal penalties in several states for those electors that vote differently then they should have. Electors can even refuse to vote for the one they are pledged to.

History shows that no election was ever changed by electors changing their vote.

[Zenos]

Can you imagine the chimpout if Obama was denied the presidency now? It would be worse than if he lost the election on Nov 4th.

[odin]

Originally Posted by Zenos

Can you imagine the chimpout if Obama was denied the presidency now? It would be worse than if he lost the election on Nov 4th.

That's the spirit! Look on the bright side!

[MikeTodd]

Originally Posted by KMRATHELL

I think the 20th amendment is clear about the VP succeeding, presuming he is eligible. If that happened can you imagine Pelosi being a heart beat away from the Presidency?

Can you also imagine the mother of all chimp-outs that would ensue!
It would make the Marchin Lootin Coon riots look like nothing more than a gang banger drive-by!X 10 [SQUARD]