When does the U.S. Supreme Court discuss Obama's eligibility?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Buck Ofama
  • Start date Start date
B

Buck Ofama

Guest
Is Jan 16 correct?
Dec 18 2008Application (08A505) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia.
Dec 23 2008Application (08A505) referred to the Court.
Dec 23 2008DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 16, 2009.
 
When hell freezes over

The supreme court doesn't deal with bogus nonsense like that. They already rejected it

Why don't you attack Obama on legitimate matters, instead of ridiculous stuff like this. It's no wonder why the Republicans lost
 
They already refused to consider it because they know the claim has no merit.
That was the end of their involvement.
 
http://www.obamacrimes.com/

{snip} URGENT NOTICE – False rumors are circulating – Justice Kennedy denied our Application for an Injunction to Stay Electoral Vote Count by Congress on January 8, 2009. However, our Writ of Certiorari is still pending and is now scheduled for Conference before U.S. Supreme Court on January 9, 2009. {unsnip}

There are also other lawsuits still pending.
 
Why would the Supreme Court discuss an Americans eligibility? They have more important things to do than to entertain right wing wacko's fantasy's.
 
That goose is cooked. Time to look forward not backwards. Its, will soon be MR. PRESIDENT OBAMA!!!
 
They have already refused to issue an injunction several times. I doubt that there will be any further discussion.

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

Donofrio
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a407.htm

Wrotnowski
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a469.htm

On Jan. 16 the application for injunction will be denied for the third time

Berg filed an application for an injunction. Application (08A391)
First it was denied by Souter on 11/3

Berg re-filed (08A505) and asked Kennedy to consider it. On Dec. 17, the application was "distributed for conference" to be held on Jan. 9. Then on the same day Kennedy decided to deny the application immediately. So nothing is going to happen on Jan. 9.

Then Berg re-filed the application for a third time; this time with Scalia. Now if the application had any merit, Scalia could have granted a temporary injunction; or he could have denied it like Souter and Kennedy, but he did not. Instead he referred it to the whole court for review on Jan. 16, probably because Scalia knew that if he simply denied it, Berg would just pick another judge and re-file it again to prolong his charade. When the whole court denies the application for an injunction, then presumably Berg will stop wasting everyone's time.
 
Back
Top