Orly Taitz "Birthers" lawsuit dismissed! | Immigration Clearinghouse

Orly Taitz “Birthers” lawsuit dismissed!

Lunatic Fringe on October 30th, 2009 4 Comments

Orly_PollyA federal judge in California has issued a brutal ruling dismissing a closely-watched “birthers’” lawsuit challenging President’s Barack Obama’s qualifications to be president. In a 30-page ruling issued Thursday morning, Judge David Carter used unusually withering language to throw out the suit prominent birthers’ attorney Orly Taitz brought on behalf of a variety of military personnel and some third-party presidential and vice presidential candidates, such as Alan Keyes.

Carter, a Clinton appointee who sits in Orange County, attacked the motives of the military plaintiffs, suggesting they were simple trying to avoid duty in war zones like Iraq and Afghanistan. “This Court will not interfere in internal military affairs nor be used as a tool by military officers to avoid deployment. The Court has a word for such a refusal to follow the orders of the President of the United States, but it will leave the issue to the military to resolve,” the judge wrote. Keyes and the other candidates also got the back of the hand from Carter as he discussed whether any of the plaintiffs could show the individualized harm needed to pursue the suit. “Plaintiffs received only four-hundredth of one percent of the vote. The Court may have already met this entire group of voters at the hearings on this matter,” the judge scoffed.

Ultimately, Carter found that while he might have had power to consider the suit before Obama’s inauguration, the court could not do so now. “There is a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue of the removal of a sitting president to a coordinate political department–the Legislative branch,” the judge wrote. “There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpret whether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office. However, on the day that President Obama took the presidential oath and was sworn in, he became President of the United States. Any removal of him from the presidency must be accomplished through the Constitution’s mechanisms for the removal of a President….The process for removal of a sitting president–removal for any reason–is within the province of Congress, not the courts.”

READ MORE AT ITMM

Graphic by “Miss Polly” and Snarkopolitan

Tags: , , ,

4 Responses to “Orly Taitz “Birthers” lawsuit dismissed!”

  1. Joey says:

    Never Give Up – Never give up!
    Dont want to take away anyones rights, dont want to kill anyone Just want my rights to a free country and one judged by a President who is not ashamed of his Birth. Right is Right Left Is Wrong…

  2. Preston says:

    Judge Land and now judge Carter, smack down the crazies (case dismissed), poor little Birthers.

    Not even “Fake News” Bill O’Reilly believes the crazies, how funny.

    http://belowthebeltway.com/2009/10/29/bill-oreilly-slams-orly-taitz/

    To all the birthers in La, La Land, it is on you to prove to all of us that your assertion is true (TOUGH WHEN YOU KEEP LOSING CASES), if there are people who were there and support your position then show us the video (everyone has a price), either put up or frankly shut-up. I heard Orly Taitz, is selling a tape (I think it’s called “Money, Lies and Video tape”). She is from Orange County, CA, now I know what the mean when they say “behind the Orange Curtain”, when they talk about Orange County, the captial of Conspiracy Theories. You know Obama has a passport, he travel abroad before he was a Senator, but I guess they were in on it.

    In my opinion the Republican Party has been taken over the most extreme religious right (people who love to push their beliefs on others while trying to take away the rights of those they just hate) and that’s who they need to extract from their party if they real want to win. Good Luck, because as they said in WACO, “We Ain’t Coming Out”.

    I heard that she now wants to investigate the “Republican 2009 Summer of Love” list: Assemblyman, Michael D. Duvall (CA), Senator John Ensign (NV), Senator Paul Stanley (TN), Governor Mark Stanford (SC), Board of Ed Chair, and Kristin Maguire AKA Bridget Keeney (SC).

  3. Jack says:

    CARTER IN A NUTSHELL: Expanded Orly Taitz default judgment case against CANDIDATE Obama for fraud into a Presidential Removal case against PRESIDENT Obama (promising a trial), but then ruled the Court lacks said Presidential Removal authority, not only dismissing the Judge-expanded Presidential Removal case (reneging on the trial), but throwing out Orly’s Candidate fraud case as well — all this on a red herring that Orly’s case was filed 1/20/09 after Obama was sworn in on 1/20/09 despite Obama was sworn in on 1/21/09 and despite the Orly-alleged fraud was committed by Candidate Obama prior to becoming President and for which there is no Presidential immunity in any case. Thus Judge Carter set up and knocked down his own straw man, and misstated fact and law to bury Orly’s actual case. Pretty nifty!!!

    • Advocate says:

      It’s called the “rule of law” Jack. And I imagine if this nutjob continues to press this bullshit issue, the same rulings will occur, based on the rule of law.

      I realize that some of you don’t care for the law, societal rules or the US Constitution unless it mirrors your own misguided ideas, but for day to day Americans, we don’t have that problem

Leave a Reply

By submitting a comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. In addition, under the conditions of the FAIR USE NOTICE, The material used on Immigration Clearinghouse may be copyrighted material, and the use of it on Immigration Clearinghouse.org may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available on a non-profit basis for educational and discussion purposes only. We believe this constitutes a ‘FAIR USE’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 USC § 107. For more information go to: <url>http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml</url> If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘FAIR USE’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Additionally, we reserve to moderate, edit or delete any comments which are designed to be slanderous, libelous or a deliberate attack against the character of the sites owners. Debate is good. Personal attacks will not be tolerated.