by Sharon Rondeau
(Apr. 25, 2021) — The Post & Email has received a copy of a submission made to the U.S. Supreme Court by Petitioner Robert C. Laity requesting a writ of certiorari regarding his challenge to Kamala Devi Harris’s constitutional eligibility to serve as the nation’s vice president.
According to the Legal Information Institute, “The U.S. Supreme Court uses certiorari to select most of the cases it hears. The writ of certiorari is a common law writ, which may be abrogated or controlled entirely by statute or court rules.”
As reported on Monday, Laity received delivery confirmation from the firm he engaged to print the required 58 copies of a booklet containing all of his filings in the case of U.S., ex rel., Robert C. Laity v. Purported Vice President Kamala Devi Harris.
“I had to send out (58) booklets to SCOTUS and the various attorneys and US Officials who are ‘parties to be served,’” Laity told us in an email on Sunday morning.
Laity believes that Harris is ineligible to serve as vice president or president as a result of both of her parents having been non-U.S. citizens when she was born in Oakland, CA in 1964. The requirements for the president and commander-in-chief are set forth in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution, one of which is that he or she must be a “natural born Citizen” and is the crux of Laity’s petition.
The 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, stipulates that any vice-presidential candidate must meet all of the qualifications of the presidency.
The booklet consists of a number of sections, the longest of which is a series of appendices numbered 1 through 64 containing Laity’s case filings in Harris beginning with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and proceeding through the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
On March 18, a three-judge panel of the appellate court declined to grant Laity’s request for a hearing en banc as reflected on the docket summary available at PACER:
As The Post & Email has reported, the appellate panel also threatened Laity with monetary sanctions for allegedly filing a “frivolous appeal” and claimed he did not have “standing” to bring the suit.
Harris is represented in the case by Benjamin Razi of Covington & Burling. According to his bio, Razi is “a savvy litigator” who “specializes in finding — and then exploiting — the weak spots in his opponents’ cases.” “He has applied this approach with great success across a range of different types of litigation, including contractual disputes, whistleblower and other ‘fraud’ cases, white collar defense, and torts,” the bio continues.
As he has claimed in many cases involving constitutional eligibility over more than a decade, Laity alleged in a January 20, 2021 letter to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. that Harris’s installation as putative vice president is part of a “pattern of Usurpations of our highest offices” commencing in 2008 “by Barack Obama acting in concert with Nancy Pelosi and Joseph Biden.” The letter is reproduced in the booklet as “App. 63” and “64” comprising the final two pages of the Supreme Court filing.
Page 1 of the booklet launches directly into the “QUESTIONS PRESENTED” to the court and begins:
The U.S. Constitution requires that a President and Vice-President of the United States be a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States pursuant to Article II, Sec 1, Clause 5 and the 12th Amendment. It is the right of the Sovereign to demand of any public official, whose bona-fides is in question, to prove that he or she is entitled by law to occupy the particular public office he or she now occupies. In the U.S. it is “We the People” who are sovereign…
Laity then presents three questions for the high court to consider, the first of which contends that Harris is “Constitutionally barred” from serving in her current office.
Question 3 asks whether or not “the Judiciary” can “grant standing to interested third parties…to remedy usurpation of our nation’s highest offices, by fraud.”
Update, April 26, 2021, 7:44 p.m. EDT: Laity provided The Post & Email with PDFs of his Supreme Court filing and appendix, which can be read in their entirety: