Sunday, November 9, 2008

AMENDED: Supreme Court Awaits Response on Obama Birth Certificate Case (Berg vs. Obama)

UPDATES: Supreme Court to Determine Legality of Berg v. Obama (see below)

Philip J. Berg announced today that the Supreme Court has "set dates" by which Obama and the DNC must respond to the Writ of Certiorari — on or before December 1, 2008.

Today, the blogosphere erupted with news about the lawsuit filed by Philip J. Berg, which compelled Obama to produce his original, long-form Hawaiian birth certificate to prove his elegibility to become President of the United States. A press release on the website states:

[Philip J. Berg] ... 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."

The NEIN Blog offers further explanation of Mr. Berg's announcement:

A review of that docket and the Rule 10 of the Supreme Court makes abundantly clear that Justice Souter's granting of a review on the Writ of Certiorari is not a right entitled to citizen Phil Berg, but rather is a matter of judcial discretion based upon a compelling reasons. That compelling reason is the Constitutional requirement that "No person except a natural born citizen ... shall be eligible to the office of President..."

What this means is that on or before 1 DECEMBER 2008 Barack Hussein Obama II must respond to the writ of certiorari, and since the Berg v Obama case hinged primarily on the question of Obama's place of birth, it is almost inconceivable that Barack Obama will thumb his nose at the Justices of the Supreme Court and he is absolutely compelled to provide a vault copy his original birth certificate.

Another very salient fact to consider at this time is that, despite all of the pronouncements of the print and broadcast media, Barack Obama is not yet the President-elect of the United States. Barack Obama can only become the President-elect after the Electoral College convenes on 15 DECEMBER 2008 in their respective state capitals around the nation and casts their votes to elect the President and the Vice President. As you can see this election day occurs two weeks after the required response to the Supreme Court granted Writ of Certiorari.

While the mainstream media has chattered on endlessly about the very important talk of what kind of dog Obama's daughters will be getting and whether Michelle Obama should have that worn "that" dress, there's been little if no talk about Obama's questionable campaign donations, potential voter fraud in key states like Ohio and Florida, Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko — and, of course, nothing about the lingering issue of his proof of citizenship.

We will watch and wait and hope for "change."


UPDATE 11/11/2008

This post has been amended to reflect updates on — U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO BERG'S WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS — and The NEIN Blog.

From, 11/10/2008

Mr. Berg has been receiving phone calls today asking for a copy of "the order from the Supreme Court requiring that Obama produce his citizenship documentation."

Mr. Berg has not received notification of any such order or anything similar to it, nor is it posted on the Supreme Court website.

From The NEIN Blog:
What this means is that on or before 1 DECEMBER 2008 Judge Surrick, who presides over the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, must respond to the Writ of Certiorari (sur-shee-uh-rare-eye) by providing to SCOTUS Justice Souter all documents and court proceedings in the case of Berg v. Obama. The crux of the matter here is that Obama (et al.) filed only a motion to dismiss on the grounds on Phil Berg's "lack of standing" to file the lawsuit. No information countering Berg's allegations or challenges to Obama's status as a natural born citizen were addressed. Judge Surrick agreed with the Obama motion and dismissed the case due to Berg's "lack of standing." Justice Souter will most certainly see the specific challenge to Obama's eligibilty pursuant to the Constitutional requirement for president and subsequently may then issue an order for Obama (et al.) to submit docmentation proving his natural born citizenship status to Judge Surrick, or to provide them directly to the SCOTUS.



Anonymous said...

I think this is wishful thinking. Obama's response to the writ will likely focus on the issue on appeal: Berg's standing to sue. As Berg himself has said, the appeal is about his standing to sue. It isn't about the merits of his allegations.

retire rich said...

nice article to read
thank u

2Conservative said...

It sounds as though the Court is intent on seeing the questionable document. That is a plus and reason for HOPE.

Christinewjc said...

I have created a blog post with extensive research on this subject that also provides some "pieces to the puzzle" revelations when I did an Internet search on this.

Talk Wisdom: Supreme Court to Determin Legality of Berg v. Obama

Anonymous said...

There was always something about him that just didn't sit right with me. Every time he spoke, a dozen red flags went off. I just don't trust him and can't understand why none of this was checked before he ran for presidency. I have to prove my son is a citizen before bringing him to elementary school.

Anonymous said...

Dems have BIG broom and HUGE carpets

Post a Comment