HAS THE U.S. SUPREME COURT RENDERED ITSELF IRRELEVANT?
by jtx
(Dec. 7, 2010) — It seems that history – and literature – are known to repeat themselves. I refer to the short story printed in 1894 by a certain A. C. Doyle entitled “Silver Blaze” which contains what must be one of the better-known Sherlock Holmes comments when Holmes mused about:
“… the curious incident of the dog in the night-time …”.
“The dog did nothing in the night-time.” and Holmes responded:
“That was the curious incident.”
That exchange of course brought me to the title for this commentary. Just as in the Silver Blaze story when the Scotland Yard detective interjected his comment, it was abundantly clear that in the recent case of Kerchner et al v. Obama et al that the Supreme Court Justices also did nothing. The real question, then, becomes WHY??
If you studied the legal submissions of Attorney Apuzzo in the case, you would see that not only were the sham objections and legal fictions of “standing,” etc. created out of whole cloth by the Justice Department well overcome by the submissions, but the Court even ignored the words of Chief Justice John Marshall (called “The Great Justice” for good reason) when in Cohens v. Virginia (1821) it was concluded in a unanimous decision that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to review state criminal proceedings. Chief Justice Marshall wrote that the Court was bound to hear all cases that involved constitutional questions, and that this jurisdiction was not dependent on the identity of the parties in the cases. Marshall argued that state laws and constitutions, when repugnant to the Constitution and federal laws, were “absolutely void.”
Marshall’s exact words on the matter in that case were:
It is most true that this Court will not take jurisdiction if it should not; but it is equally true that it must take jurisdiction if it should. The judiciary cannot, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the Constitution. We cannot pass it by because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, we must decide it if it be brought before us. We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the Constitution. Questions may occur which we would gladly avoid, but we cannot avoid them. All we can do is to exercise our best judgment and conscientiously to perform our duty. In doing this on the present occasion, we find this tribunal invested with appellate jurisdiction in all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States. We find no exception to this grant, and we cannot insert one. [emphasis added]
… and yet the Justices (or at least six of them) took it upon themselves, like Holmes’ dog in the night, to remain silent, and by doing so committed “… treason to the Constitution …” as Marshall mentioned. Even the two Obama-appointed Justices chose to NOT recuse themselves although they had ample financial, political, and professional standing reasons for doing so. Most people would recognize – at the very least – the appearance of partiality or bias by Sotomayor and Kagan as being beholden to the person who appointed them if not their multimillion-dollar financial windfall that such a lifetime appointment entails (say, 35 years at $150,000 per year, or about $5.25 million apiece).
All of the above makes one wonder if the observation by Sherlock Holmes does not indeed apply here in “The Curious Incident of the Justices That Did Not Bark!!!” when indeed they most assuredly should have.
Then again, perhaps the Justices are no worse that the figurehead who appointed them since he has chosen to “not bark” about his early life records also. The oddest thing is what Holmes had noted – why did no one not notice and pursue the matter???
Tom the veteran has it right .Kagan affirmed Toms point that there no longer are natural rights, god given or otherwise. There is only the sound of a ticking clock punctuated by the rustling of an ancient rope now.
Chief Justice John Roberts may as well resign in shame now, because his opportunity to stand-up for America, and to abide by his oath of office, is fast slipping away from him while he continues to hide behind his illustrious, and now apparently unwarranted title. When one is appointed to such high office, there comes with such appointment, some expectatition of responsibility to the folks, and he is letting us down big-time. He is letting Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, U.S. Army, and LCDR Walter Fitzpatrick, U.S. Navy (Ret.) down in particular, but also “We-the-People” in general. Chief Justice John Roberts is just NOT up to the job, and history will show that he should have resigned while he had some honor, and that he wasted a huge opportunity to do right for America, but instead chose to ride the gravy-train as long as possible, while hiding from his sworn commitments and responsibilities, and therefore deserved the impeachment “he will get”. Treasons to say the least. Having an enemy in such lofty positions, (i.e. terrorist-usurper-obama, not-so-admiral-mullen, looser-subversive-reid, perfidious-pelosi, etc), is far more dangerous and destructive than meeting the same enemy on the battle-field, because with the latter – you know what you’ve got, and what you are dealing with. However – the entire system will indeed be purged, one way or another !!! (Matthew 13:50)
“FCC COMMISSION WANTS TO TEST THE ‘PUBLIC VALUE’ OF EVERY BROADCAST STATION”
By: Susan Jones
CNSNews.com
December 3, 2010
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/fcc-commissioner-wants-test-public-value
Excerpt:
“Dave Iles said:
I worked for many years with CBS-TV News, and I can tell you that: Richard Perl, in 2004, at a Washington Press gathering that was televised by CSPAN, openly stated that: “Every word and image that the American people see in mass media is controlled by the Pentagon.” Then he laughed like it was a big joke on the American people. It’s still the same or worse today.
In addition, I can also tell you that the leadership of both political parties will pretend to fight on camera but then, when the program is over and the studio lights come down … they are slapping each other on the back and heading for the closest bar to buy each other drinks. The whole two-party system is staged at the top. It’s nothing more than professional wrestling or tag-team dictatorship. Our national political process is an illusion and totally controlled by global bankers.
I like many others in the so called “elite TV news broadcasting”, were “invited” to leave the network for trying to expose the lies, fraud and endless cover-ups in government, corporate corruption, and global banking. Many people in the media know what’s really going on but, are too afraid to speak-out for not only fear of losing their jobs but, being “black listed” and never being able to find work in media again.
The best way to effect real social awareness and change is to expose the controlled mass media and support alternative media that is speaking truth to corrupt power.”
# # # #
“E pluribus buffoonum? CONGRESS SLAMS OBAMA: LAWMAKERS SAY PRESIDENT’S OMITTING GOD UNDERCUTS AMERICAN HISTORY”
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Posted: December 07, 2010
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=237349
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“OUR RIGHTS COME FROM GOD, NOT BARACK OBAMA”
Vietnam hero tells conference patriots ‘drew faith from Bible’
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
September 18, 2010
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=205073
Excerpt:
“In an emotional keynote address to the WND “Taking America Back” conference in Miami, Adm. Jeremiah Denton, the former U.S. senator from Alabama and Vietnam war POW held in captivity for almost eight years, called for the United States to return to an openly declared belief in God.
“America is great because America is good,” he told the attendees, insisting America will remain good only if American leaders return to following God’s law.
“The patriots who founded this nation drew their faith from the Bible, even if that’s not the way President Obama likes to talk about it,” he said.”
Read More Here:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=205073
# # # #
Since 1956 the official national motto of the United States Of America has been
“In God We Trust.”
http://www.catholic.net/index.php?option=zenit&id=31175
MUST SEE & LISTEN TO VIDEOS!!! Lots Of New Information Here:
“Wayne Madsen Report: Assange Set Up By CIA Operative? Alex Jones Tv 1/2”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1vYajkZHrY
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“In Denial: US ‘shoots messenger’ to save face in WikiLeaks scandal”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xBJ5-ZtusU&feature=related
“Washington’s denying it ignored numerous cases of Iraqi torture and killing over the past six years. The allegations stem from 400,000 secret U.S. files on the war in Iraq, leaked by the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks.”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“Wal-Mart Invasion Part of Larger DHS Takeover of America”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntCYiegLcxw
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“Wayne Madsen Bombshell: Barack Obama Conclusively Outed as CIA Creation – Alex Jones Tv 1/3”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okKud3SHUjY&playnext=1&list=PL71B449CCF11FDC98&index=66
See: ALL Of This VIdeo & Especially At: 6:03 – 6:39 …they shredded & destroyed his mother’s passport which would be stamped where he was with his mother…
Please Read Also: “Oops! Obama’s Mama’s Passport Is Destroyed!!”
By Jerome R. Corsi, August 1, 2010
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=186677
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“Wayne Madsen Bombshell: Barack Obama Conclusively Outed as CIA Creation – Alex Jones Tv 2/3”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEtHy0zuZT8&feature=watch_response
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“Wayne Madsen Bombshell: Barack Obama Conclusively Outed as CIA Creation – Alex Jones Tv 3/3”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpQVoKLZ6pU&feature=watch_response
Barry Soetoro Soebarkah alias Barack Obama is exposed as a “CIA creation” & as a “CIA asset” who was chosen, primed, groomed, & set up TO DESTROY & TO OVERTHROW The USA From Inside The USA Government!!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
We’ve talked about the crime of treason many times on this post but we may have been remiss in that we have never talked about treachery. What’s the difference you ask?
Treachery implies being secretly traitorous but seeming friendly and loyal: In treachery deceit is added to disloyalty. Wereas Treason is performing overt acts to help the enemies of one’s country or government: Acting to aid a hostile power is treason.
IMO, the SCOTUS is treacherous in their refusal to address the matter of Kerchner et al v. Obama et al. Unfortunately, the Justices are not bound by the same oath to “support and defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic” because their oath of office is not defined in the Constitution. See Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code. As to the POTUS there is no question about his treachery. MP
I think the answer is a little simpler. The court does not want to be viewed making a political decision contrary to the congress and every state election board and the majority of the people. When it was forced to decide Gore v Bush it took a lot of heat for getting involved. Even a conservative could have rationalized that the vote in FL was a states’ rights issue and needed no second guessing from the SCOTUS. Kerchner was a case that was turned down at every level before SCOTUS. It was easy for them to avoid, particularly as the congress with a change of House leadership now has the opportunity to right the wrong. Additionally states are moving to require proof of eligibility in the near future. They don’t want to blatantly correct congress on what many people would consider a completely political move on their part. Much better if the decision comes in the future after Obama is shown as a fraud through the leakage that surely will come. We still have Rubio and Jindal and when a case goes before the court after a Sec of State (TX or AZ??) denies them a place on the ballot, then the SCOTUS can rule of the meaning of NBC without the political heat of throwing out the “first black president” and risking the civil strife that would accompany that move. Congress can slap their heads in a duh moment exclaiming utter surprise . Lastly, without Obama the conservatives would never have come out in force to stop the ever moving trend toward socialism. If we can educate our children to be independent thinkers or just get them to read Atlas Shrugged. Our country can right this wrong.
In Florida we now have a veto proof state senate and a conservative governor who has appointed Michelle Rhee (Obama’s loss!) to his transition team. We now have a chance to make some significant improvements in education in Florida. This would not have happened had Hillary been elected.
We now need to concentrate on state laws requiring candidates for Pres to prove their eligibility. Keep the heat on. The problem will get solved. And this president who thinks the maintenance of his fraud is more important than LtCol Lakin’s freedom will get his comeuppance.
I would say IMPEACH Chief Justice John Roberts and his corrupt cronies on the SCOTUS bench- if it were not for the apparent fact that the impeaching authority, CONGRESS, is just as corrupt as they are! I do not advocate, and never will advocate or take part in, any physical force or violence, but I ask WHAT THE HELL ARE WE, THE PEOPLE, SUPPOSED TO DO? In a sick sort of way, it’s almost comforting as a “senior citizen” like me to know that I may not “be around” to enjoy the benefits of all of this “hope,” “change” and “transparency!” But, WHAT ABOUT MY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN, AND YOURS?
Perhaps the problem is that those that claim to “know” the law, actually don’t know it that well and they have set themselves up for failure. Just because the Justices didn’t take the case doesn’t make them wrong, perhaps it is your interpretation of the law that is wrong.
What part of Justice Marshall’s opinion do you not understand?
In Justice Marshall’s view, there can be no doubt about it, they were wrong for not taking the case.
whats_up:
Obviously you are not well-read on recusal. At least 2 had ample reasons for such and any normal person would certainly see that.
By that reasoning, any case that targets SCOTUS (or all of its justices combined) itself could never be heard by SCOTUS since there would be no judges to even hear the case in the first place.
Besides, it’s a waste of energy crying over the non-recusal since there is no indication SCOTUS would have taken up the case if those 2 judges had been out, given its obvious tendency to “evade the issue”.
If you’re convinced the courts are part of the problem, why bother taking it up with them anyway?
This point by jtx could not have been expressed more concisely or clearly – perhaps as Justice Marshall himself might have.
There is little doubt that some majority of the court has violated their oath and responsibility in Article III to assume original jurisdiction “In all cases affecting Ambassadors and other public minsters and councils.” Does that amount to treason? Does ignoring a plea to clarify the common law definition repeated by Chief Justices Marshall, Waite, and Hughes, and by John Bingham who initiated the 14th Amendment, constitute “Good Behavior” in Article II Section 1? From Article 1 Section III, “The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.” Will enough patriots control the Senate in 2012 to raise the issue of Impeaching Justices of the Court?
The usurpation of the Presidency, the failure to observe the common-law notion of recusal when there is self interest, makes Impeachment of Supreme Court Justices a necessity if our children are to inherit what our founders fought for. We know certainly that the Constitution is only an obstacle to those justices who “evade the issue” as Justice Thomas let us know that they were. The titular President said as much publically in a radio interview. Justice Roberts, who knew Obama was born to a British Subject, had an obligation to clarify his eligibility. Otherwise, Roberts failure to raise the issue later is misprision of felony, and perhaps more.
We are accustomed now to the screams of the useful idiots of the media. We will remember all those who were complicit, including those in Congress who knew and did nothing. They are close to destroying our Republic, but their time has passed. They have become shrill enemies of the majority, and won’t succeed.
I think the author fails to recognize, or admit, that we are no longer living in the same America we once knew! Our government has always engaged in shady activities, but never to this extent against its own people. We are being lead into a New World Order, which means the Constitution is no longer applicable. There is no longer a need to protect our God given Natural Rights. Our governemnt has become tyrannical and no longer cares about individual rights, just collective needs! We’re being transformed into Borg’s!
For God and Country