Dr. Orly Taitz has has requested a re-file petition of Lightfoot v. Bowen,
to Chief Justice John Roberts of the US Supreme Court.
Request to Re-file Petition; Lightfoot v. Bowen with Chief Justice John Roberts
This is an open cover letter and it is being posted on the Internet, YouTube, and will be read on a number of radio stations, particularly radio stations around military bases, forwarded to Congress, Senate, Governors of the States and mass media. This legal action, as 20 other actions filed in the past few months, is seeking judicial intervention due to the fact that Mr. Barack Obama, whose father was a Kenyan-British citizen, is not a Natural Born Citizen and is not eligible to be the President of this country.
It also states that Mr. Obama did not prove his citizenship at all, since the state of Hawaii allows issuance of Hawaiian Birth Certificates to foreign born children of Hawaiian residents and there is mounting evidence that Mr. Obama was not born in Hawaii, whereby he will not be a citizen at all.
The plaintiffs in this action are a vice-presidential candidate on the ballot, electors and voters. The majority of the plaintiffs have served many years of their lives in the U.S. military and risked their lives pursuant to their oath, to defend the Constitution of this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
The plaintiffs and other members of the U.S. military are deeply concerned about the fact that none of the cases related to Mr. Obama’s lack of eligibility were heard on their merits. The plaintiffs are also concerned about the following: You have recorded a program “Conversations with Chief Justice Roberts.” Numerous high schools students were flown in to D.C. and participated in a discussion about the Constitution, law and the Supreme Court with you.
This program was fully funded by the Annenberg foundation, as it clearly states on the video released, and it appears that as a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court you consider Annenberg to be a reputable organization, supporting the Constitution and you support their efforts. The problem with it is that Annenberg has been employing on their Annenberg Challenge Board, William Ayers, a non-repentant terrorist that participated in the bombing of a police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972. As late as 2001, Mr. Ayers stated in a NY times interview: “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel I didn’t do enough.”
From 1995, the Chairman of Annenberg Challenge was none else, but Mr. Barack Obama. Annenberg has created an offshoot, called FactCheck.org, Annenberg political FactCheck, that was supposed to provide an unbiased checking of the facts. In reality, Annenberg FactCheck has actively and intentionally defrauded the American public in leading them to believe that Mr. Obama is a natural born citizen and is eligible for the U.S. presidency. Annenberg FactCheck intentionally omitted:
It omitted the fact that such certification can be obtained based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborating evidence.
It omitted the fact that there was no corroborating evidence of Mr. Obama’s birth from any hospital, nurse or hospital administrator from Hawaii, while there were numerous statements from Mr. Obama’s Kenyan grandmother, Baptist Bishop and ambassador of Kenya about Mr. Obama being born there. If that is the case, Mr. Obama is not a U.S. citizen and will need to apply and wait for his Green Card.
My clients, as well as 300 million American citizens, including thousands of members of the military that are asked to risk their lives to defend the Constitution of this country would like to know if the Supreme Court Justices, particularly Chief Justice Roberts, (who will swear in the President on the Bible) are willing to give a few hours of their time to hear the Oral Arguments in defense of our Constitution. They want to know if the justices believe in the Constitution on which this country was built, or whether they are prepared to tear it apart in favor of some new world order.
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
Counsel for the Petitioners
26302 La Paz Suite 211
Mission Viejo Ca 92691
Ph: 949-586-8110 (c) 949-683-5411
I would Dr. Orly Taitz to explain James Buchanan Presidency. His parents (both Father and Mother) immigrated to the US from Ireland. Andrew Jackson was another president that both parents were foreign. I would like to know how this is different from Barack Obama’s situation. Were there any challenges to their presidencies? There are four other presidents that had at least one foreign born parent. Can someone ask Dr. Orly to comment on those presidents?
I believe because of the above presidents that had at least one foreign born parent will set precedence for future presidents.
This completely kills her arguement.
Please pay attention!
The parents must merely be citizens!
They can be born anywhere!!!
Dr. Taitz documents the definition of the phrase “natural born citizen” by Emerich de Vattel in “The Law of Nations.” The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Minor v. Happersett supports the Vattel definition of the phrase “natural born citizen” in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution.
In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite in the decision dated March 29, 1875, wrote:
“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.” (88 U.S. 162)
“It was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves . . . natural-born citizens.”
Furthermore, in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, Justice Gray in a decision dated March 28, 1898, re-affirmed the Minor v. Happersett interpretation:
“In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in question, said: ‘The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.’ And he proceeded to resort to the common law as an aid in the construction of this provision. 21 Wall. 167.” (169 U.S. 649)
Sen. Obama’s website, fightthesmears.com admits that:
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children.”
Thus under the test of Minor v. Happersett Sen. Obama does not qualify as a natural born citizen.
Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirms that understanding and the construction the framers used in regards to birthright and jurisdiction while speaking on civil rights of citizens in the House on March 9, 1866:
“ [I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…. . .
EXCERPT OF SECRETARY CHERTOFF TESTIMONY FROM APRIL 2, 2008:
Chairman Leahy. We will come back to that. I would mention one other thing, if I might, Senator Specter. Let me just ask this: I believe–and we have had some question in this Committee to have a special law passed declaring that Senator McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal, that he meets the constitutional requirement to be President. I fully believe he does. I have never had any question in my mind that he meets our constitutional requirement. You are a former Federal judge. You are the head of the agency that executes Federal immigration law. Do you have any doubt in your mind–I mean, I have none in mine. Do you have any doubt in your mind that he is constitutionally eligible to become President?
Secretary Chertoff. My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.
Chairman Leahy. That is mine, too. Thank you.
Citizen Wells –
Dr. Orly contacted me today and said that she wanted to get in touch with you. She also said: ‘Please ask him to go on my blog drorly.blogspot.com. I am posting a new open letter, asking everybody to write to Pres. Bush and asking to appoint Patrick Fitzgerald to be a Special Prosecutor. This will assure us that Obama will not fire Fitzgerald (if Fitzgerald doesn’t indict Obama for massive fraud by the 20th). We need to make sure Fitzgerald continues cleaning up Chicago mafia, before this mafia takes over the whole country. They are so dangerously close.’
You may contact her at: firstname.lastname@example.org .
… TIA, … Bob R
Much as I’d like to be encouraged by Dr. Taitz’ filing, we must face up to the fact that this country currently has a judiciary that has zero problem with letting Bernie Madoff, who willfully and intentionally planned to defraud as many innocent citizens as possible of their life savings without so much as a tinge of hestitation, to roam about under “house arrest” in his multi-million dollar mansion (with full access to his ill-gotten resources).
This is a full fledged Coup d’Etat, so the rule of law will not come into play. It is a movement to overthrow the Constitution, and Justice Roberts has notified Mr. Obama of his price tag; an automatic “cost of living” adjustment for the judiciary.
I’d love to be pleasantly surprised and have the SCOTUS actually do their jobs and investigate the eligibility issue, but I find it more credible to imagine that I will be held in a re-education camp within the next year.
I’m surprised you publish anything from Orly Taitz.
She is so clearly off her rocker it gives the rest of us a bad name.
Please elaborate on Dr. Taitz.
She seemed pretty lucid yesterday.
Her cover letter to Justice Roberts is completely unprofessional and inappropriate. There are punctuation errors. There are vague threats about associating him with a conspiracy through the Annenberg Foundation. She makes completely irrelevant allusions to the Trilateral Commission.
Her lawsuit faces long, long odds and she doesn’t know enough to write a professional and respectful cover letter to the court. If the Court had any wonders about whether she is a legitimate lawyer or a nutty small time hack, she confirmed the latter.
Her site is getting more and more unhinged. She is trying to track down parking tickets Obama got 20 years ago and is suspicious because Obama’s great uncle died last fall. He was in his 90s. She has been trying to find Obama’s mother’s primary school records.
What is any of this going to prove that is remotely relevant to anything?
What is the argument? Ok, Supreme Court, Congress, you don’t believe us about his citizenship (fairly likely that won’t go anywhere), wait until we reveal what we found out about his mother’s grades in grammar school. And Obama had lots of parking tickets, so he can’t be president.
How many people are going to buy any of that? To any objective observer it will say far more about Orly and her sanity than about Obama.
Is it really necessary to shoot the messenger.
At least she is doing something.
I spoke to her at length yesterday and her strategy made sense.
Unless you are willing to put your neck out there, don’t be so critical of her.
I am not too damn happy with the US Supreme Court either.
They should have cleared up this quagmire regarding natural born citizen
some time ago.
the uncle was according to a newspaper interview 82.
The next day he died supposedly.
In fact the 22nd of October is in question to be the true death date of Madelyn D.
I understand where she is going.
Barack Obamas whole life is a made up story.
All true evidence is hidden.
Everything he tells turns out to be a lie.
No wonder we are going down every road.
The proof can be found at the most unlikely place.
Also time is a factor.
And if her English is not perfect, or her cover letter not flawless.
She always says she needs help.
(and excuse my imperfect English too, it is my third language)
Actually, I’ve read that the brother didn’t die. Orly never read the article and turns out it didn’t say that he had died.
If you are going to make her captain of the ship, you better be sure she knows how to sail. She is definitely screwing up.
How about fellow concerned citizen.
It took me 10 seconds to read the 10/22 Seattle Times article which quotes Charles Payne. (Actually in appeared in many papers). Nothing in there about him dying, yet Orly spins a whole new conspiracy angle of all of Obama’s relatives dying. All she had to do was take a few moments to read the article.
Makes us not just look like liars, but really bad liars.
BerlinBerlin – How does making up something that can be rebutted by anyone with Google help to prove that someone else made up stuff about his life?
You don’t think that makes anyone who praises her look foolish? C’mon, I thought we were smarter like this.
A closer review of the recently surfaced divorce papers behind allows for a few deductions:
1. Stanley Ann D. Obama was not aware that in Kenya Barack Obama, Sr. was already married. Otherwise, she would have filed for an Annulment of Marriage.
Why is this important? It makes it less likely that Stlanley Ann D. Obama visited Kenya before Barack Obama was born.
Why? Take a look at things coming to light by Orly Taitz and others, (and Women will probably better versed in this kind of decision than I am), but after visiting your new husband in his home country of Kenya you discover that he already had a wife with two children, would you wait several years before filing for divorce or annulment? Probably not. So, this speaks against her visiting Kenya.
But, Obama’s third wife, Ruth Nidersand, to whom he was married from 1965 to 1972, was also an American, and did return with Obama to Kenya, and she lives there till now. Her son is one of Barack Obama’s brothers. The Sunday London Times wrote about the brother and his company in Shenzhen, China:
“Mark Ndesandjo is the son of Barack Obama’s late father and his third wife, an American woman named Ruth Nidesand who runs the up-market Maduri kindergarten in Nairobi.”
2. Now let me take you into the stratosphere of deduction:
Had Stanley Ann D. Obama’s marriage never taken place (the newly released papers prove that it did), or that Stanley Ann D. Obama had sought an annulment rather than divorce, then Obama’s citizenship would have been transmitted to him by his mother alone, and not his father. Remember, Leo Donofrio’s Case!
The reason she sought a divorce and not an annulment, is probably because she was never aware of Obama, Sr.’s Kenyan wife and children prior to filing for divorce.
What does this tell us about Barack Obama, Sr.?
On Orly’s site, attorney John Carlson says references to Obama, Jr. were typed on a different typewriter.? ? ? ?
On the Soetero divorce papers — not Obama, Sr.
Look folks, we do NOT even know his real name. This and “Obama’s” legal citizenship, mean nothing to many traitors I see, but the law means EVERYTHING to good American citizens who have the right to see our Constitution enforced and respected as the law of this Republic. How our government can all take oath’s to uphold these laws, then walk away from a huge Constitutional crsis as this is. leaves me not trusting anything now and feeling very angry. These politicians ask us to trust them with many TRILLIONS of debt and can’t even give citizens a honest candidate for our highest office…who do you trust?
It’s very difficult to trust a liar. It’s that simple.
Does anyone know if there is a marriage license for Stanley Armour “Ann” Dunham and Barack Obama Sr?
Is there a divorce attorney who can tell us if a couple has to show proof that they were married before they can receive a divorce?
Could a divorce be granted even though the couple was never legally married?
Is there a license for the Soetoro marriage?
You have stated for example “Obama’s great uncle died last fall. He was in his 90s.”
That is not true, he is 82 or so.
The firt commenter on Orly’s post said something about, he is in his 90s.
That was a cynical Obot comment and of course false (that’s what they do)
What I am trying to say is, of course this happens to Orly too, just imagine how much information comes in all the time, the time pressure.
I like the fact, that she puts it all out.
This is a good tactic.
Throw it all on the wall, see what sticks.
I am sure she gets mean attacks by the Obots all day long, please let us stand united.
Let’s make sure Obama is not the captain and the boat sinks.
Here’s the answer to my questions — This articles says that Ann was close to Barack, Sr.’s 1st Wife, and wrote her often????
“Barack Sr, a Muslim, would go on to marry two more women – Barack Jr’s mother Ann Dunham, an American he met during a scholarship to the United States, and an American teacher called Ruth.
But it was Kezia who remained his one true love and to whom he always returned.
Strangely, Kezia and Ann became great friends, writing to each other often.
So when Ann died of breast cancer in 1995, it was Kezia who formed the link to Barack’s past; Kezia who now takes pride of place at special family gatherings and Kezia who was there to celebrate Barack Jr’s 2005 inauguration as an Illinois senator.
She first met the man who could become America’s first black president 20 years ago when he visited the family compound in Alego, north-western Kenya, an Aids-ravaged hamlet where chickens roam free and little has changed in more than 50 years.
They have since seen each other in America and Bracknell where Kezia moved to be near her daughter Auma – Barack’s half sister – who now lives abroad.”
Pingback: IMPEACH OBAMA? By: Devvy « ~THE “G” BLOG - Gunny G Online~
My point about Orly is that she publishes 2 posts saying Charles Payne died on the same day as Madelyn Payne based on an article she could have read herself just by going to the Seattle Times website. Do you think anyone that obviously sloppy is going to have any credibility?
And her frequent citing to Pravda? How much do we know about Orly and her background and where she is coming from?
She seems pretty determined to make anyone questioning Obama look foolish. Maybe she is doing it intentionally.
I agree, do we have any proof Orly is naturalized? Maybe she is still Russian citizen. Her law school was on line. Probably easy to defraud and get law license. Do they even require her to take courses? Someone should ask for her transcript
Can we please quit shooting the messenger!!
I, personally, have been “shot at” enough times to resemble swiss cheese.
Orly is not running for president.
Question everything, but we have a crisis we need to stay focused on.
I would like to add, if one is not part of the solution,
they are part of the problem.
Orly is working hard to try and make a difference.
If you don’t agree with her, get out of the way and focus
your energies elsewhere.
I’m serious. I think she is trying to hurt us. Why would she go out of her way to offend the Supreme Court by writing that cover letter?
She is sabotaging this.
I meant, that with all this information coming in, she can make mistakes, like putting it out, before it is verified.
Also it is so hard to verify anything, because off the wall of silence and ignorance.
I am sure some money is also invested to cover Os secrets.
Well, the Pravda is one of few newspapers that publishes about this issue, and as I understand the journalist writing at Pravda online in English is an American who could not find another news magazine willing to take on that issue.
In the end we are all amatuers fighting a machine.
Still, it ain’t over till it’s over.
First Down: Richardson.
I believe that the US Supreme Court Justices need to be “offended”
and get off their ass and do something that they should have done
at least by earlier in the 2008 election year, and probably earlier.
That is, clarify the natural born citizen provision and state duties
in regard to presidential eligibility.
I am more than ready to “offend” the US Supreme Court Justices.
They need to read some Harry Truman quotes and practices
such as “The buck stops here.”
My brother is a lawyer and has been for 40 years. He says you write something like that you say two things – 1) I’m a hack because I don’t even know how to write a cover letter, and 2) please throw my case into the trash.
Makes me wonder if Orly is really a lawyer. If she is , then she really must be trying to sabotage this.
I spent 20 years in Europe ready to defend us against the Russian. That she is a Russian is enough for me to question her.
She isn’t the “messenger. ” She is trying to be the face of Obama opposition and set us up to be ridiculed.
First of all ArmyVet, thank you for your service.
I am certain she is not perfect.
Everyone has a role to play.
I believed from the beginning that Philip Berg’s lawsuit, without addressing
it’s merits, had just as much value as an informational forum and advertising
tool. Orly provides a similar service.
Another byproduct of the lawsuits is serving as a catalyst to get others
involved in lawsuits and other endeavors.
Remember the sinking of the Bismarck?
The beginning of the end for that “unstoppable” ship was an outdated torpedo
bomber that damaged the rudder, thus slowing it down for it’s ultimate
It didn’t occur to me that the lawsuits were intended just to get publicity. Maybe that makes sense. Maybe we can agree on that much.
But I still dont trust her.
We either have a Constitution or we don’t. The last I heard we do. Follow it that’s what its for!
You can all keep going around and around, but the bottom line is that Orly is just requesting that someone who looks at issues like this for a living look at the facts. I believe that the 52% of the AOL survey who questioned this situation are like me, show me some tangible proof and life will go on. This whole thing is way too simple. We have seen the computer generated paper from Hawaii, yet the original hospital birth record is locked up in the Govener’s office and any of his Kenyan records are locked up in the priminister’s office. Again you all can going on and on with who became friends with who, but is way too simple one piece of paper and the whole issue is done.
Does anyone think that Obama himself, with the cooperation of the governor of Hawaii, could not obtain a copy of his true and complete birth certficate — if it does in fact exist? He could make it available to all major media for publication. He could make it available on the Internet. If it proves he was born in Hawaii, then we all could shut up about it. Obama can end the skepticism and doubt any time he wishes.
The crucial point about parking tickets and primary school records is that they documentay evidence establishing where someone actually was when they were ticketed, or attended school. Until recently, all people were relying on about Obama’s whereabouts throughout his life were his 2 so-callede “memoirs” which are semi-fictionalized, have many omissions, do not follow strict chronological order, and contain no corroborating evidence (footnotes citing corroborating documents like birth certificates, school records and yes, even parking tickets). Until this year very few people knew S. Ann Dunham atttended the U. of Washington some 3-4 weeks after giving birth to Obama. AtlasShrugs actually did what should have been done long ago: got U. of Washington letters confirming Dunham’s enrollment there Fall 1961. We need more, much more such documentary evidence, if that includes parking tickets because it’s easier to get them than a birth certificate, so be it.
Re: “Had Stanley Ann D. Obama’s marriage never taken place (the newly released papers prove that it did), or that Stanley Ann D. Obama had sought an annulment rather than divorce, then Obama’s citizenship would have been transmitted to him by his mother alone, and not his father.”
Amusing. This is based on the theory that the legal father is what counts. So, if the marriage never took place, or was annulled, or Obama’s father was really someone else, then the Kenya/English influence on him would be nil.
On the other hand, one could argue that the REAL father is the one that had the real impact on him, and that the citizenship of his real father is what counts.
But if so, with some say 20-30% of children not being the result of their legal fathers (according to various surveys and legal tests), then some day we may have to administer a DNA test to a candidate to determine if his father was a US citizen.
So, better stick with the legal father. But, if so, we weaken the theory of Vattel, and some say, the writers of the Constitution, who must have believed that the citizenship of the father had a REAL impact on the potential president, and not merely a legal impact.
The whole Vattel theory is dated. If my parents was naturalized before I was born, then I have “allegiance” to the USA and (if also born in the USA) eligible to be president. If one of my parents was naturalized AFTER I was born, I have allegiance to that country, or partial allegiance to that country, and hence am not eligible.
A better guide, avoiding the real/legal father trap and the date of naturalization trap, is NOT Vattel. It is US Code Title 8, which merely requires that someone be born in the USA.
Re: “any of his Kenyan records are locked up in the priminister’s office. ” Actually, only WND has claimed that there are records and that they are locked up. If WND had really believed that there were records that were locked up, it would have asked AP or UPI or Reuters to confirm. After all, it would be news if there were any Obama files in Kenya and if the Kenyan government had locked them up.
So far, only WND has said this. Why, if this is true, does not WND ask other news media for confirmation. AP and Reuters have offices in Kenya.
Pingback: Ms Placed Democrat » Obama Tosses Dean Under The Bus!
citizenwells said “Orly is not running for president”.
That’s true but she might be running for whatever post opens up after her “Patriots” in the armed forces revolt and overthrow the lawful United States government tomorrow. If you think I’m being ridiculous, then you haven’t been reading her blog.
After declaring “Nurenberg [sic] style trials” for anyone guilty of contradicting her version of the truth about Obama, this is what she said in an article titled “what should be done?”:
What I always find interesting is that people think it’s just about the birth certificate.
Yes, a copy of the long form birth certificate would prove whether he was born in Hawaii or not, but it still does not resolve the issue of him being a natural born citizen.
His father being a British subject and his citizenship transferring to his son brings into question of whether due to Obama’s dual citizenship was he under the full jurisdiction of the U.S.
If you have dual citizenship it is just logical that there is no way you could be considered a natural born citizen.
That’s like you having a golden retriever and your neighbor having a yellow lab and they mate. But because the litter was born on your property they are considered golden retrievers.
The logic just isn’t there.
The father, if identified, whether married or out of wedlock, is the natural and primary source of nationality.
This is natural law. It also assumes men take financial and spiritual responsibility for their children and wives. Until 1922, and still in some countries, the nationality of the woman automatically becomes that of the husband.
In the case of British law, if the child is born out of British controlled lands, the father must register his intent with the British Sec of State to accept and support the child within one year. If that passes, Britain no longer has jurisdiction and the mother’s nationality prevails.
If born within British lands, the child is fully under British jurisdiction. Any foreign naturalization is within the process of divorce and naturalization as a minor.
Under U.S. law, if the father fails to support the child, he loses legal status as ‘parent.’ It is as if the child has no legal father. Thus, nationality reverts to that of the mother. A divorce or custody proceeding generally makes the loss of ‘parent’ status official.