by Sharon Rondeau

(Mar. 19, 2021) — A request for an en banc hearing of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a case challenging Kamala Harris’s constitutional eligibility to serve was denied on Thursday.

On February 5, a three-judge panel denied petitioner Robert C. Laity’s appeal, issuing a “show-cause” order as to why he should not be sanctioned over what the panel deemed a “frivolous” case with a clearly-defined outcome. On February 8, Laity argued that sanctions were not justifiable since his concern arises out of his desire to “protect the Presidency of the United States and the Vice-Presidency of the United States from usurpation.”

Laity contends that because neither of Harris’s parents was a U.S. citizen at the time of her birth in Oakland, CA in 1964, she is not a “natural born Citizen” as envisioned by the Founders when they wrote Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution containing the qualifications for the president which were later imposed on all vice-presidential candidates by the 12th Amendment. “The evidence is overwhelming that Kamala Devi Harris is not the bona-fide Vice-President of the United States because she does not meet Article II and 12th Amendment criteria that she be a ‘Natural Born Citizen,’ Laity wrote in his reply to the court. “That this court suggested sua sponte that my appeal is ‘frivolous’ (that there is no serious purpose or value) in trying to ensure that our highest offices are not breached gives me great cause for concern.”

In Thursday’s order, the three-judge panel ordered that “the order to show cause be discharged” without sanctions but that “Laity’s response to this court’s order to show cause does not challenge the district court’s ruling that he lacks standing. He has therefore failed to demonstrate that his appeal is not frivolous.”

“Although the court declines to impose sanctions in this instance, Laity is forewarned that this court will not hesitate to grant a motion for sanctions against him, or impose sanctions on its own motion, in any of his future appeals, if warranted,” the court warned.

The order denying an en banc rehearing consists of one sentence:

Upon consideration of the petition for rehearing en banc, and the absence of a request by any member of the court for a vote, it is

ORDERED that the petition be denied.

Join the Conversation

64 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. I am in the process of preparing my “Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit”.

    Translation: I am appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court. More info to come shortly.

    1. Re: Kagan and Sotomayor

      all – i.e. each and every of their certiorari conference votes is/are Void ab initio since January 2009 and they both must recuse from any further cert conference participation going forward

    1. Scotus assigned 11th circuit justice Thomas asked to assume jurisdiction of a proposed Laity DCC judicial council judicial complaint and finally vet Harris (and aka Obama and his appointment of Stacy Abrams USDC GAMD district judge sister Leslie in the Georgia 2020 election cases and cease avoiding and finally define natural born citizen CINC eligibility) prior to the “Speaker Trump” 118th congress 2022 midterm election.

  2. suggest you now file judicial complaint with the Judicial Council USCA-DCC vs all of the USDCC judges — especially the aka Obama circuit judges — and expedite demand immediate judicial council appeal to Clarence Thomas instead of compromised and conflicted John Roberts the normally DCC assigned SCOTUS justice. since it is not public eat risk of further sanction threats is minimal.

    1. The former vice president already certified that she received the most electoral votes and Vice President Harris already took the oath of office.

        1. The vice president’s certification what the U.S. Constitution requires. Those who are unconvinced by what the U.S. Constitution requires should endeavor to amend the U.S. Constitution.

          The U.S. Constitution, for example, requires natural-born citizenship, not “America First.” And Arpaio, for example, never showed that Obama wasn’t a natural-born citizen.

          None of which is relevant to Laity’s lack of standing.

        2. No one said that citizen and natural born citizen are synonymous.

          Regardless, Laity’s lawsuit and appeal were dismissed because he lacked standing.

        1. Vice President Harris received a majority of the electoral votes for the vice presidency, which the former vice president certified.

  3. The US Supreme Court however has affirmed and reaffirmed that an NBC is one born in the US to parents who are both US Citizens themselves. Those cases control Dennis. Also see the Naturalization Act of 1790 and 1795. The last part of your comment on being born overseas to US Citizen parents. That was the law in 1790 but it was REPEALED in 1795. Any court that ruled that a person born overseas,even to US parents, is an NBC is wrong.

  4. Reading the comments herein, on this peerless P&E “natural born Citizen” website, I agree, our U.S. Government has devolved into a lawless puppet show when it comes to electing our Presidents and VP’s.

    We the People, you and me, are KING, because we own everything= the homes, the businesses, the highways et al. We own OUR bus [USA], elected government officials drive OUR bus [if We consent] and hired bureaurats maintain OUR bus, so to speak.

    The “natural born Citizen” controversy has been “All Talk and No Shock” since 08-28-08; We owners of USA must now go forward with “All Task and No Ask” to EXCLUDE all Presidents and VP’s with foreign citizenships and allegiances, as John Jay intended:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXFwqUi3zR0&feature=youtu.be

    John Jay intended that his Convention invention of 1787, “natural born [U.S.] Citizen”, EXCLUDE the admission of foreigners within the office of President: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-05-02-0251

    John Jay later proposed an (approved) amendment to New York’s U.S. Constitution ratification on July 25, 1788 that “natural born Citizen” include only freeholders as President, VP and all members of Congress:
    http://legalhistoryblog.blogspot.com/2016/05/john-jay-on-natural-born-citizenship.html#:~:text=While%20serving%20as%20a%20delegate,the%20Convention%20of%20the%20State

    READ THIS BOOK (I did) to get inside the head of John Jay and discern why he ingrained such a natural distrust of foreigners within the highest offices of USA: https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/196110.John_Jay

    From September 17, 1787 until 08-28-08, the codified “natural born [U.S.] Citizen” invention has meant, and has been acted upon, to EXCLUDE the admission of persons with known foreign citizenships and allegiances from the office of President: https://www.scribd.com/doc/48856102/All-U-S-Presidents-Eligibility-Grandfather-Clause-Natural-Born-Citizen-Clause-or-Seated-by-Fraud

      1. That is the opinion of errant Judges who don’t want to perform their constitutional duty. That you acquiesce to that stance shows that you care not about the Constitution and the over six SCOTUS cases that define NBC as one born in the US to parents who are both US Citizens.

        1. In the United States, the law is determined by the judges, and not by the opinions of the losing litigants.

          And no judge agrees with Laity’s opinion about what these “over six SCOTUS cases” actually ruled.

          The D.C. courts here couldn’t even address natural-born citizenship because Laity repeatedly failed to show that he had standing to invoke their jurisdiction.

  5. As an Australian citizen, I am unclear as to this argument when Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution states ‘No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States…’. I’m keen to understand!

    1. Since the Founders did not define the term, two basic interpretations of “natural born Citizen” have emerged: a person born in the U.S. to citizen parents; and a person born in the U.S. irrespective of his/her parents’ citizenship at the time. Variants of that are a person born to one U.S.-citizen parent within the U.S. and a person born overseas to one or both U.S.-citizen parents.

      1. My question on this is, what is the difference between king kamala harris being able to run and the child of an alien couple who flew here from Mars and their spacecraft crashed, while the alien momma was about to give birth, and then she does give birth an hour after they crash here? Constitution doesn’t specify they have to be from Earth. It just says “person”, and whose to say that aliens from Mars are not “persons?” All joking aside…would this scenario be the same as king kamala’s…or an anchor baby from Mexico?

      2. So far all lower courts which have decided the issue (about a dozen) have ruled that birth in the US is all that is required to be considered a natural born citizen. There are a few exceptions but in general the courts have said the parent status is immaterial. For the most part, those court decisions were based on the 1898 Supreme Court decision in US v Wong Kim Ark.

        There have been two or three lower court rulings that children born overseas to US citizen parent(s) are also natural born citizens.

    2. Cheryl, It states in the pertinent section that “No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, AT THE TIME of the adaption of this constitution shall be eligible to the office of President…” That means that those non natural born U.S. citizens alive at the adaption of our constitution WERE eligible. It was well understood that an NBC is one born IN the U.S. to two U.S. Citizen parents. There were no NBCs of the US prior to the US becoming a nation. The first President born in the US to two US Citizen parents was President Martin Van Buren (#8). The first (7) were not NBCs but were grandfathered in as “citizen[s] of the United States at the time of the adaption of this constitution”.
      NONE of those people alive at the time of the adaption of our constitution is alive today, as far as I know. That means that the only citizens that are eligible today to be President or V.P. are Natural born US Citizens. Our US Supreme Court has affirmed and reaffirmed the definition of NBC as one born IN the United States to parents who are US Citizens themselves. Anyone not meeting that criteria is not eligible to be President or V.P.

  6. Our U.S. federal government was overthrown many decades ago by many criminals, both foreign and domestic enemies, who operate in many branches of the lawless federal U.S. government who work inside & outside of our U.S. federal and state governments to bankrupt, destroy and overthrow the U.S. federal and state governments and the American people.

    The criminals who work inside and outside of the federal and state governments must be stopped, indicted, put on public trials, convicted & removed from our government in order to defend, protect and save the American people and the existence of the sovereignty of the United States of America from their daily lawless injustices, long trains of grotesque abuses of power of usurpations, their outrageous refusals to obey the U.S. Constitution and our just U.S. laws & their oaths of office, and their dangerous lawless daily crimes and evils the American people must stop.

    1. WE have started a Oregon State Jural Assembly that we have a congress of Delegates too for it, the Union. We need delegates in NM, NV, AZ still, but it is becoming a more perfect union for sure. Each state will need more Jurors to sign on with living testimony affidavits. Watch how admiralty Law consumed the land without our permission, how words mean so much here republickofamerica.com I run recall Kate Brown Group on FB the group with United on the flag map!

  7. The three judge panel should be ashamed of their blatant cowardice and brazen corruption. Adding insult to injury, they threaten Laity with sanctions! We must remember the names of these judges. One day, the shoe will be on the other foot! Our judicial system is broken from the top down! It is beyond redemption! Every legal channel has been tried to bring all three usurpers to justice! The justice system has completely failed to uphold our most cherished laws; the laws of our Constitution! What’s next?

  8. Of Course !!! Absolutely NOTHING was done about “Obama” being ineligible for the same reason. Why should this be any different ? I applaud your efforts, I truly do, but I am afraid you are wasting your time.

    1. This is what Jesus would call, “straining at the gnat and swallowing the camel.” (Mt. 23:24)
      In other words, the pharisees and hypocrites of the court majored in a minor (Laity has no standing), when they should have majored in directing their attention to the really important matter of what the law says: BOTH PARENTS US CITIZENS AT THE TIME OF BIRTH.

      There will be no justice until the Judge of the universe returns. In the meantime, do the best we can in exposing injustice.

      1. Standing is a concept that comes from the U.S. Constitution, which grants federal courts only limited jurisdiction.

        It would be unconstitutional for a court to rule when it lacked jurisdiction to make a ruling.

        1. “Article III makes NO mention of “standing”. Neither do the writings of the framers. The definition of Standing in Lujan [v. Defenders of Wildlife] was apparently pulled out of thin air. There is NO support in Lujan for any historical or originalist foundations for ‘standing…The current standing requirements of showing a ‘concrete and particularized injury, have little to do with constitutional law…it is emphatically the duty of the Judicial department tp say what the law is. This regardless of the concreteness or particularity of a plaintiff’s injuries”- Source: “Rethinking Article III Standing requirement” by Max Kennerly, Esq.

  9. What we need to do is put together a team of people (as many as possible) that can devote the time, energy and money to park our butts in front of those courts and tell them, ‘we’re not leaving until Laity’s case gets heard, fairly, without bias, even if we gotta stay out here a whole-damn-year.” No…no loitering! Anybody here ever watch those 1st Amendment Auditors on Youtube? They can’t get arrested for loitering as long as they are filming for a purpose, on public property. I mean, wow, they cuss at the police, film the inside of (our tax payers cars) tyrants’ cars, the open laptop screens, (which CAN be filmed because the police (tyrants) are supposed to CREATE their own privacy. Anything we can see from public property, we can film. The team that is put together can shuttle back & forth to local hotel for sleeping, eating, bathing etc. AND DO THE SAME TO SUPREME COURT; TELL THEM WE ARE NOT MOVING, REPEAT, NOT MOVING UNTIL ROBERTS RESIGNS AND IS ARRESTED, AND WHOEVER ELSE….? AND WE DEMAND, REPEAT, DEMAND LAITY’S CASE BE HEARD, WITHOUT BIAS, FAIRLY.
    FILM THEM, IN FRONT OF COURT/SUPREME COURT BUILDING ..FRONT, SIDES, BACK…24/7/365…EACH 1st AMENDMENT AUDITOR CREATE THEIR OWN YOUTUBE CHANNEL BEFORE TEAM IS PUT TOGETHER, THAT WAY, HEY, THEY’RE NOT LOITERING, FILMING FOR A PURPOSE, TO UPLOAD TO THEIR YOUTUBE CHANNEL TO GET VIEWS/MONETARY PAY OUTS FROM YOUTUBE, JUST LIKE THE 100’s OF 1st AMENDMENT AUDITORS ARE DOING NOW. AND SOME OF THEM ARE BANKING…BELIEVE ME. THERE’S NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY IN PUBLIC, SO ANYTHING YOU CAN SEE WITH YOUR EYES YOU CAN FILM…ASK GOOGLE CARS! EVEN IF YOU ZOOM IN THROUGH AN OPEN WINDOW IN COURT HOUSE, AND FILM AN OPEN LAPTOP AND IT HAS bathhouse barry barack hussein soetoro obama’s (OR WHATEVER THE HECK HIS NAME IS) FILES ON THE SCREEN, OH WELL, AS LONG AS YOU’RE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY YOU CAN FILM IT…”THEY” WILL SIMPLY HAVE TO CLOSE THEIR BLINDS IF THEY DON’T WANT IT FILMED. I’M IN TEXAS, BUT I HAVE HEARD THE 1st AMENDMENT AUDITORS’ ON YOUTUBE MENTION “THE BANE ACT”, IN CALIFORNIA. SO, I’M NOT SURE IF IT IS EVERY STATE. BUT REGARDLESS OF BANE ACT, YOU CAN STILL DO THE FILMING IN PUBLIC.
    AGAIN, THE TEAM WILL SAY, “WE ARE NOT MOVING OUR BUTTS UNTIL LAITY’S CASES ARE HEARD, FAIRLY AND WITHOUT BIAS…..PERIOD…PERIOD…PERIOD!

  10. The Oregon Grand Jury heard evidence on Kamala and the four political partied Republican, Democrat, Green and Libertarian and the Oregon SoS for fraud and misprision of felony for permitting Kamala’s name to appear on the ballot and treason when it was voted on.
    The Grand Jury voted a true bill, and a presentment to the de facto.

  11. typical libtard response, they have no rebuttal so they just refuse to hear the case because they know there is no defense against the truth. This is more devildemocommiecrat tyranny imposed upon We the People by satanists determined to destroy America and turn it into a 3rd world puppet state of the new world order global dictatorship!!!!!!!!!!

  12. The headline and beginning paragraphs of this article should state that the issue on appeal was standing, not whether Kamala Harris is a natural born citizen. Someone reading only the headline and first paragraphs as written will come away with thinking that the court refused to hear whether Kamala Harris is a natural born citizen because the issue is frivolous and sanctionable which is not the case.

  13. They omitted sanctions, because if they had imposed them, he would have a strong case to take to the U.S. Supreme Court, on that issue alone.

  14. Yet another process denial of every citizen’s 1st Amendment right to petition the government without punishment or reprisal.

    1. The First Amendment protects the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

      It does not protect the right to frivolously waste government resources.

      1. The 1st Amendment DOES protect the right to petition the government for a redress of grievance without punishment or reprisal, and the latter is what the court threatened to do.

        Frivolous on what basis? As far as I can tell the court never let Mr. Laity proffer any evidence.

        1. Laity filed his lawsuit, and he was not punished for doing so. Laity then filed an appeal without any legal basis, and he was not punished for doing so.

          The circuit court, however, said it would punish him in the future for his frivolous waste of government resources. There is no absolute right to waste government resources.

          As the district and circuit courts explained, Laity lacked standing. It was Laity’s burden to prove that he had standing, and he repeatedly failed to provide a legally based rationale.

        2. There is no indication that the standing is determined by the plaintiff’s level of fame. The famous, unlike Laity, can afford lawyers who know how to make persuasive arguments.

      2. Read my response to the Court on standing in which several court cases were referenced that supported my contention on standing and the fact that it was in the courts discretion to GRANT standing upon my posting of bond. Furthermore, just (12) days ago SCOTUS in an (8-1) opinion ruled that “Nominal damages” is sufficient to show standing. The USCCA judges just chose to IGNORE my reply and erroneously claim that I proffered no claim of standing. That is simply not true. See: Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, USSCt. (March 8, 2021). I WILL be filing a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in the next (90) days. More to come.

        1. There’s no indication that the courts’ dismissing Laity’s case involved any fraud, waste, mismanagement, or abuse of authority.

  15. This shows just who is in control of our country! It is not the people is it, no it is the criminals that are in office that protect each other for fear they will be uncovered!

    1. @Kathy,
      Nice, concise and to the point comment! Thank you.
      By the way, you stold my ELECTION of thoughts and words. ELECTION FRAUD!

    2. Thank you Sharon:
      IMO, at the moment in 2009 when John Roberts swore-in the ineligible, identity fraud con-artist Obama, the Constitutions meaning of “natural born citizen” was changed forever just by ignoring it. The crimes committed by allowing/assisting and/or covering for Obama’s usurpation and installation as America’s putative president are so HUGE that no court is ever going to find Obama illegitimate. That truth effectively eliminated the original meaning of, “natural born citizen”, and opened the path for other ineligible candidates. Unfortunately, I don’t believe the original meaning is ever coming back.

      No one with the power to do so wanted to deal with how to undo what a U.S. President, who was later determined to be illegitimate, had done once he was sworn-in. One example, how can the lives of members the U.S. military lost while following orders from an illegitimate commander-in-chief be brought back, or those lives lost in foreign countries because of actions by an illegitimate president? Once Obama was sworn-in there was zero chance of him being found ineligible and removed from office. I applaud those who tried to expose the fraud Obama and get him removed from office… but the job they were trying to do was impossible.

      It took me years to accept this reality. Seeing what happened to Donald Trump when he defeated the planned after Obama cover of Hillary Clinton reinforced my belief that those guilty in The Obama Fraud, both political parties, will do anything to prevent the truth about Barry from ever being fully revealed and acted on….The many complicit are protecting themselves from the enormous crime and severe penalties which should accompany it. That crime is giving America’s military and her government to her enemies and it’s still on-going cover-up.

      IMO this was always easy to see as it unfolded over the years, but the crimes were so huge, and so many rich and powerful people are involved, both in America and other nations, that the truth was never going to win. America and the World are in deep trouble……

      1. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

        Obama’s ineligibility to serve as President is “The Truth Too Big To Tell”. And Kamala Harris is ineligible for the exact same reason.

        1. So is the fact that his “wife” is a tranny. His name is Michael Robinson, former linebacker for the Oregon Beavers. This is enough for you to google for the information.

    3. Very good comment Kathy. You just said as much in two sentences as I did in my long comment….and you got it exactly right……… ^^^ :- )

    4. John Guandolo explains who is in control of our country, the United States of America here:

      ~ MUST HEAR! IMPORTANT INFO! ~ UTT RADIO SHOW! ~

      Click On The Radio Archives Here:

      IMPORTANT INFO! Radio Show: 2_7_21, 11-12 PM —
      Published on February 16, 2021

      https://www.understandingthethreat.com/radio-show/

      * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

      Communist & Islamic Movements in America and UTT’s Victory Campaign