Chief Judge of the 9th Circuit: "What if your party were to run a dog for the US President, would the Secretary of State be obligated to put a dog on the ballot, too?
Orly Taitz
Press release
Law offices of Orly Taitz
A three judge panel of the 9th Circuit questions legitimacy of the Political question doctrine, which was used until today to allow Obama to run for President while Obama used a name not legally his and fabricated IDs.
Today a three judge panel presided over the case of Peta Lindsey et al v Secretary of State of California Bowen. 13-085. This case was noted in legal briefs by Attorney Taitz in CA and MS. The case revolves around a decision by SOS of CA Bowen to throw of the ballot a candidate for Presidnet from Peace and Freedom Party Peta Lindsey. Bowen did her own research and found that Lindsey is not constitutionally eligible for Presidency because she was not 35 years old at the time she ran for office. At the same time the same SOS Bowen refused to disqualify Obama and claimed Obama’s qualification is a political question doctrine, which is only up to the Congress to resolve. SOS of CA and lower court flagrantly engaged in violation of 14th amendment and violation of equal protection right as SOS Bowen removed from the ballot Lindsey but refused to remove equally ineligible Obama.
Today only Lindsey case was heard. The case was presided by the Chief Justice of the 9th Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski. When told about the political question doctrine, Kozinski responded: “What if your party were to run a dog for the US President, would the Secretary of State be obligated to put a dog on the ballot, too?
The panel consisted of ALEX KOZINSKI, DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN and MARY H. MURGUIA. Judge O’Scanlain is the same judge, which upheld the second amendment rights in his decision against the San Diego County and found that “moral character” provision imposed by the county were unconstitutional. Judge Murguia is Obama appointee.
While posing questions for the attorneys the panel asked, what would be the outcome if the Secretary of State was a birther? The only birther who ran for SOS of CA, was attorney Taitz, who got over half a million voted in the primary in 2010. It appears the judge of the panel are well aware of Taitz, her run for SOS and her case of Grinols, Judd, Noonan et al v Electoral College, Congress, Obama, Secretary of State of California, Governor of California. In Grinols Judge England already ruled that that candidate for President Keith Judd had standing, the only reason the case was dismissed, was a political question doctrine. Now it looks like the court does not believe that the political question doctrine is applicable to ineligible candidates. This is a very important development and hopefully a prelude to overturning of Grinols case and finally going back to court for full discovery of Obama’s bogus IDs, his use of a stolen Social security number and his foreign citizenship.
Attorney Taitz is trying to get a transcript of this hearing to submit to courts in CA and MS. Transcripts are notoriously expensive, particularly when asked on a rush basis. Any and all donations to cover the fee would be greatly appreciated. Donations can be given via pay-pal at OrlytaitzESQ.com or via mail at 29839 Santa Margarita, ste 100 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688