Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, July 22, 2010
Just in from Charles Kerchner, lead plaintiff in Kerchner v Obama and Congress.
“For Immediate Release – 22 July 2010
Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Legal ‘Response’ to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal Order is Successful.
The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Attorney Apuzzo Not Liable for Obama’s/Congress’ Damages and Costs Incurred by Them in Defending the Kerchner Appeal | by Attorney Mario Apuzzo
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/07/third-circuit-court-of-appeals-finds.html
—————————————————–
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Attorney Apuzzo Not Liable for Obama’s/Congress’ Damages and Costs Incurred by Them in Defending the Kerchner Appeal
On July 2, 2010, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision affirming the New Jersey Federal District Court’s dismissal of the Kerchner et al v. Obama/Congress et al case for lack of Article III standing. The Court ordered that I show cause in 14 days why the Court should not find me liable for just damages and costs suffered by the defendants, not in having to defend against the merits of plaintiffs’ underlying claims that Putative President Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen,” that he has yet to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii, that Congress failed to exercise its constitutional duty to properly vet and investigate Obama’s “natural born Citizen” status, and that former Vice President and President of the Senate, Dick Cheney, and current Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, were complicit in that Congressional failure, but rather in having to defendant against what the court considers to be a frivolous appeal of the District Court’s dismissal of their claims on the ground of Article III standing. On Monday, July 19, 2010, I filed my response. This afternoon, on July 22, 2010, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision on whether it should impose the damages and costs upon me. The Court has decided not to impose any damages and costs upon me and has discharged its order to show cause. This means that the matter of damages and costs is closed. Here is the Court’s decision:
“ORDER (SLOVITER, BARRY and HARDIMAN, Circuit Judges) On July 2, 2010, this Court filed an Order to Show Cause directing Appellants’ counsel to show cause in writing why he should not be subject to an Order pursuant to F.R.A.P. 38 for pursuing a frivolous appeal. In response, Mario Apuzzo filed a 95-page statement that contains, inter alia, numerous statements directed to the merits of this Court’s opinion, which the Court finds unpersuasive. His request that the Court reconsider its opinion is denied, as the appropriate procedure for that issue is through a Petition for Rehearing. However, based on Mr. Apuzzo’s explanation of his efforts to research the applicable law on standing, we hereby discharge the Order to Show Cause, filed. Sloviter, Authoring Judge. (PDB).”
I want to thank everyone who supported and encouraged me in this battle. This includes everyone who expressed their feelings on this matter through blog posts, articles, and comments, and emails.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
July 22, 2010
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
###
——————————————————
For additional information and/or comment contact Attorney Mario Apuzzo of Jamesburg NJ at:
Blog: http://puzo1.blogspot.com
Email: apuzzo@erols.com
Tel: 732-521-1900
Fax: 732-521-3906″
Citizen WElls 
Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, March 24, 2010, Charles Kerchner comments on Appellant’s Reply Brief, Mario Apuzzo attorney
Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, March 24, 2010, Charles Kerchner comments
From Charles Kerchner, lead plaintiff in Kerchner v Obama and Congress.
“For immediate release – 23 March 2010
Commander Kerchner’s comments on the Appellant’s Reply Brief filed today by Atty Apuzzo in the Kerchner v Obama & Congress Lawsuit Appeal
By now many of you have likely had time to read Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s outstanding Appellant’s Reply Brief filed today with the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA. The closing two paragraphs sum up the issues and consequences and the duty of the federal court’s role in resolving the core constitutional legal question of this lawsuit very well. Imo, Atty Apuzzo’s words will live in history. The federal courts must take this case or our Constitutional Republic is doomed and on its way to the scrap heaps of history.
Atty Apuzzo writes on pages 29 & 30:
—————————————-
“The Supreme Court has warned us what can happen to our republic if its government does not observe the laws of the land. United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438 (1928). A finding of no jurisdiction will mean that we as a nation accept usurpation and tyranny by a small group of individuals who can act in concert and gain control of both parties and overthrow the constitutional order of our Republic and that citizens of the United States such as the plaintiffs, whose life, liberty, safety, security, tranquility, and property are threatened by such a plan and action, do not have any due process to protect themselves through a legal action in which they ask the judicial branch of government to protect them by enforcing the Constitution.
Judicial review is absolutely necessary when the other two branches of government act in a concerted way to subvert and ignore the Constitution’s requirements defining eligibility standards for the most powerful office of the land, the President and Commander in Chief of the Military. This power balance is important to the survival of our Republic and our Constitution. Plaintiffs’ case goes to the very core of our Constitution, the fundamental law of our land, and whether ultimately our legal system truly means anything when it comes to controversial but critical constitutional issues. For the Court to grant plaintiffs standing, find no violation of the political question doctrine, and rule that it has jurisdiction over plaintiffs claims will do no harm to the role that the judiciary plays in our Constitutional Republic but will rather confirm that elections in America must adhere to the rule of law.”
—————————————–
Bravo-Zulu Mario! You have done your job well. In your various briefs you have given the courts the facts and correctly cited the laws of our nation, including the Constitution which is the fundamental law of the land. The decision is now in the hands of the Appellate Court. They must now do their duty in our constitutional system of checks and balances and use their judicial review powers granted to them by We the People in the Constitution, and confirmed by the great Chief Justice John Marshall, to prevent usurpation of power by the other two branches. May they look for guidance to God, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and the U.S. Supreme Court decisions you cited in your Appellant’s Opening Brief and other briefs, and then do the correct thing per their oath “… to support and defend the Constitution of our United States against all enemies foreign and domestic … so help me God”, and remand the case back to the District Court for a trial on the merits so we can learn before the bar of a court of law the true legal identity of Obama and reveal what he has been hiding from the American people, that he is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” to constitutional standards. And in doing so, We the People will remove the Usurper from the Oval Office.
If you have not read the entire Reply Brief you can read it here:
Kerchner v Obama & Congress – Appellant’s Reply Brief – Filed 23 Mar 2010 – U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals – Philadelphia PA
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28779811/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-Appeal-Appellant-s-Reply-Brief-filed-23-Mar-2010
May God Bless and Save America,
Charles Kerchner
Commander USNR (Retired)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress
http:www.protectourliberty.org
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
####”
406 Comments
Posted in America, Americans, Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, Civil rights, Commander in Chief, Congress, constitution, Constitution Hall of Shame, Court of Appeals, Courts, DC, Declaration of Independence, Democrats, Election, Election 2008, Election Law, Election update, Federal Court, First Amendment, Founding Fathers, Government, impeachment, Judges, Kerchner v Obama, Law firms, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Liberalism, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, Military officers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Obama thugs, politicians, Politics, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, The Case Against Barack Obama, United States, US Constitution, US District Court, US House of Representatives, US Military, US Senate, Usurper, voters, Washington DC, white house
Tagged 2010, Charles Kerchner comments on Appellant's Reply Brief, Kerchner V Obama and Congress, March 24, Mario Apuzzo attorney, update