Tag Archives: Marbury V Madison

President Trump announces nominee for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, WhiteHouse.gov, Watch live July 9, 2018 9:00 PM, Marbury V Madison

President Trump announces nominee for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, WhiteHouse.gov, Watch live July 9, 2018 9:00 PM, Marbury V Madison

“Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.”
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each.

So if a law be in opposition to the constitution; if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution, disregarding the law; the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.

If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising under the constitution should be decided without examining the instrument under which it arises? This is too extravagant to be maintained.”
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”…Marbury V Madison

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

 

From WhiteHouse.gov.

“Our next Supreme Court justice

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced on June 27 that he would retire from the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of this month. Tonight, President Trump will be joined by Vice President Mike Pence and senior leaders from Congress as he announces his nominee to be our Nation’s 114th Supreme Court Justice.

In his first year, President Trump appointed a record number of Federal judges, each of whom is standing up for our rights. That record includes the confirmation of Justice Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court last year. In just a little more than a year on the bench, Justice Gorsuch has proven to be a crucial voice for restoring Constitutional principles to our government.

By appointing rule-of-law judges, President Trump has reshaped the judiciary. That work goes hand-in-hand with the President’s program to reduce the size and scope of government, which includes signing the largest tax cuts in history, implementing unprecedented regulatory reform, and promoting individual liberties and religious freedoms.”

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Advertisements

Kerchner v Obama, Supreme Court fails, Duty as checks and balances, Duty to interpret Constitution, Duty to uphold Constitution, Marbury v Madison

Kerchner v Obama, Supreme Court fails, Duty as checks and balances, Duty to interpret Constitution, Duty to uphold Constitution, Marbury v Madison

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial
department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to
particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that
rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must
decide on the operation of each.”

“If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the
constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature;
the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the
case to which they both apply.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all
cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention
of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the
constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising
under the constitution should be decided without examining the
instrument under which it arises?  This is too extravagant to
be maintained.”

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

The US Supreme Court has denied the petition for writ of certiorari in Kerchner v Obama.

“(ORDER LIST: 562 U.S.)
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2010
CERTIORARI”
“CERTIORARI DENIED”
“10-446
KERCHNER, CHARLES, ET AL. V. OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF U.S., ET AL.
The motion of Western Center for Journalism for leave to
file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The petition for a
writ of certiorari is denied.”

http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/112910zor.pdf

The two main reasons for the existence of the US Supreme Court are as follows:

1. Serve as checks and balances for the other two branches of government . Executive and Legislative.

2. Interpret the US Constitution.

Once again they have failed to do their duty and they should be impeached.

Irrespective of any birth certificate issues surrounding Obama, and those are enough to warrant involvement from the Supreme Court, Obama is clearly not a Natural Born Citizen and the justices know it. They are avoiding the Obama eligibility issues for some reason and should be removed from the court.

For those on the far left, those still in denial, or those incapable of rational thought, the decision to deny the petition is not a ruling on the Kerchner v Obama or any other eligibility case. The justices do not have to give a reason and have not done so. They have simply chosen the coward’s way out. I quoted Marbury v Madison again for a reason.

The swearing in of Obama by Chief Justice Roberts and the difficulty in  stating the oath and the subsequent reswearing in are unprecedented in my lifetime.

The oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

CNN has covered the Supreme Court denial.
“The Supreme Court has again cast aside an appeal that raised doubts about President Barack Obama’s U.S. citizenship, a grass-roots legal issue that has gained little legal or political footing, but continues to persist in the courts.

The justices without comment Monday rejected a challenge from Charles Kerchner Jr., a Pennsylvania man who sought a trial in federal court forcing the president to produce documents regarding his birth and citizenship.

Kerchner’s attorney, Mario Apuzzo, had argued in a petition with the Supreme Court that Obama did not fit the definition of a “natural-born citizen” required for the nation’s highest office, as defined by Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.

That clause states, “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.””

“State birth certificate records show he was born August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii. His mother is a native of Kansas; his father was born in Kenya, which at the time was a British colony.”
“Obama and his staff produced copies of his birth certificate when he was running for president in 2008”

Read more:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/29/scotus.birther.appeal/

There is no corroboration of the following:

“State birth certificate records show he was born August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii.”

The following is an outright lie and CNN knows it.

“Obama and his staff produced copies of his birth certificate when he was running for president in 2008”

From an honest journalist who once worked at CNN.

Kerchner V Obama and Congress, Support Kerchner lawsuit, Charles Kerchner CDR USNR, Attorney Mario Apuzzo, US Constitution, Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury V Madison, Obama birth certificate, Father Kenyan British, Barack Obama not natural born citizen, No birth certificate, Obama spends millions to avoid

“Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.”

“So if a law be in opposition to the constitution; if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution, disregarding the law; the court must determine which of  these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.

If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.” …Chief Justice Marshall, “Marbury V Madison”

 

I have been in contact with lead plaintiff Charles Kerchner and attorney Mario Apuzzo since the inception of their lawsuit against Obama and Congress. The lawsuit is still alive and they are actively engaged in raising public awareness about the lawsuit and eligibility issues. One of their efforts has been to advertise in the Washington Times. Advertising and court cases require much money. Charles Kerchner has asked for my assistance. The Citizen Wells blog has a new page devoted to the Kerchner V Obama lawsuit and there is a link on that page and blog front page for donations to the cause.

Why is this lawsuit and other lawsuits important, aside from the obvious objection of removing an illegal usurper from office and saving this country?

By mid 2008, two things were abundantly clear:
1. There was enough evidence against Obama to stop his campaign for the presidency and the mainstream media was in bed with him.

  • Documented close ties to Tony Rezko, Rod Blagojevich and numerous crime and corruption figures.
  • Obama had kept hidden almost all of his important records.
  • There was no legitimate evidence that Obama was eligible and much compelling evidence that Obama was not a natural born citizen.

2. A Chicken V Egg scenario was emerging due to the Orwellian public perception crafting of the Obama camp and mainstream media. The court cases must emerge and move forward.

  • The US Constitution must be upheld.
  • The US Citizens must know the truth.
  • A constitutional crisis had to be avoided by preventing an illegal usurper from taking the presidency.

The merits of eligibility lawsuits will not be discussed here. That exercise has it’s place in the classrooms, court rooms and forums of the nation. No one desires to diminish the protocols and thought processes. However, it is clear from reading the opinion of Chief Justice Marshall, in “Marbury V Madison” that he adheres to the intent of the founding fathers to follow the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land, trumping other legislation and procedures. It is also clear that judges and state officials have forgotten or ignored their solemn oaths to uphold the US Constitution. Judges appear to be more concerned about subtle nuances, protocol, and yes, politics, than fulfilling their constitutional roles.

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?

If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime.”…Chief Justice Marshall, “Marbury V Madison”

So even though the issue of Barack Obama’s eligibility is governed by the US Constitution and subsequent Admendments, judges and state officials have chosen to ignore their sacred duties and leave the American people devoid of the crucial protection of checks and balances and the protection of the supreme law of the land.

This has transformed the many eligibility lawsuits into a watershed role probably not envisioned by the founding fathers. We now have the lawsuits proving a point, critical to the survival of this nation, in the court of public information and common sense. Before the appearance of the multitude of lawsuits, the mainstream media in cahoots with the Obama camp, controlled public perceptions of Obama’s records and eligibility as well as legal definitions such as natural born citizen. Public awareness of Obama’s eligibility is still to a large extent governed by these Orwellian attempts. The straw that broke the camel’s back, imprisoned Al Capone and ultimately will be the Achilles heel of Obama, is a detail. In Capone’s case he was indicted on tax evasion charges. In Obama’s case it is the fact that he has spent so many resources to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and other records. This has been the blessing of the court cases. Despite the best attempts to pass the buck, play party politics and ignore constitutional responsibility, the truth about Barack Obama’s eligibility is emerging.
So why should you support an eligibility lawsuit? First and foremost we must demand that the US Constitution be adhered to as the supreme law of the land. Secondly, and what will ultimately indict Obama in the hearts and souls of the American public…

Why?

Barack Obama has employed a legion of private and government attorneys to prevent revealing his country of birth. Innocent and eligible persons seeking the office of president do not do that.
Support the Kerchner V Obama lawsuit and make certain you inform as many people as possible, Ask the simple question above.

From the new page at Citizen Wells.

 

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr, V Barack Hussein Obama II

Charles Kerchner
CDR USNR (Ret)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress

Donate To The Cause

Charles Kerchner, Attorney Mario Apuzzo interview.

For more information about the history of this case:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/