Kerchner et al v Obama et al Petition for Writ of Certiorari Distributed to the U.S. Supreme Court Justices for Conference Scheduled for 23 Nov 2010See the new activity on the U.S. Supreme Court Docket at this link:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-446.htm
To read the Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court filed on 30 Sep 2010 see this link:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38506403/Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-filed-with-the-U-S-Supreme-Court-for-Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress
For More Information contact:
Mario Apuzzo, Esq., Jamesburg, New Jersey
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Tel: 732-521-1900, Fax: 732-521-3906
Email: apuzzo@erols.com
More information will be posted as we receive it.
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Pennsylvania USA
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner et al v Obama et al
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
####
10 comments:
WorldNetDaily reports on the Congressional Eligibility Cheat Sheet.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=225561
It's good to see this rather damning document brought before a mass audience both unfiltered and unfettered.
Just emailed the author the WND article (Jerome Corsi) at jcorsi@worldnetdaily.com
Hello Mr. Corsi,
First, let me thank you for your honest and forthright reporting, which is such a rarity in this day and age. Secondly, I would like to ask you to correct one thing with your article "Congress report concedes Obama eligibility unvetted" on WND by giving credit to the proper people who first brought this document to light. The document was appropriated by researcher Tom Deacon and first revealed on Mario Apuzzo's blog on November 5th, 2010 as you can see here:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/11/members-of-congress-memo-what-to-tell.html
Much thanks for bringing this rather damning document to a mass audience.
Sincerely,
bdwilcox
Hopefully he corrects the oversight.
Ok what exactly does this mean regarding the Nov.23rd date??
Hokie,
It means that the actual physical printed copies of the Petition which we sent to SCOTUS on 30 Sep 2010 and which were up to this point in the physical custory custody of the Clerk at SCOTUS in a box have now been individually distributed physically to the Justices (and their respective legal assistants). We provided 40 printed copies of the Petition to the Clerk at SCOTUS for this purpose. The Justices will now read the Petition and study it. Then at the regularly scheduled conference of the Justices on 23 Nov, they will discuss it and decide whether to grant the Writ of Certiorari or not. The conferences are held in private with only the Justices present. We now have to wait and see what they decide to do on the 23rd of Nov, take up one or all the four questions posed to them in our Petition to them to be heard and legally determined and answered by them, or not. You can read the four questions at this link along with the entire Petition that the Justices now have in their possession and can read in preparation for the 23 Nov conference. The conference determines if we get to the next step in the legal process. Mario can explain more as to the possible next steps the Supreme Court could order.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38506403/Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-filed-with-the-U-S-Supreme-Court-for-Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Thanks so much for explaining that. I would love for this to be heard. How could the American people be so fooled by someone like this?
When will they decide if Sotomayor, and Kagen will be recused. They should not have any influence.
CDR Kerchner and Mr. Apuzzo.... You may recall that I have expressed several times the obstacles of approaching the Courts with the questions being asked from the 'political question' perspective and of the difficulty in rising to the 'standing' requirements from that approach.
But I now bow to the well-constructed and argued Petition upon the Docket at SCOTUS.
The removing of the underlying question from the realm of the political by the legally supported reasoning of which branch may or may not address the question with the additional acknowledgment of the potential self-serving potentialities has moved the Court, and therefore the Constitution, into the light of understanding that SCOTUS should not be able to 'evade / avoid'.
Each and every part of the effort speaks to the import of the issue with great clarity and profound respect for the Rule of Law, which we serve in our capacities as sovereign citizens.
It was a year ago nearly to the day that my feeble 1st attempt at SCOTUS was scheduled for Conference under Rule 11 of the Court. It was made MOOT by the 'Dismissal in part, Remand in part' by the 10th Circuit and I've been struggling through an administrative process in order to establish requisite 'standing'.
But along with my sincere appreciation of the Petition you put forward I add my fervent Prayer that you prevail in your arguments that I may rest in my pursuit to be acknowledged as a 'Constitutional natural born citizen'.
Hello Mr. Apuzzo,
I would like to bring to your attention the following article "Congress report concedes Obama eligibility unvetted" at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=225561
And WHY ON EARTH OBAMA WAS UNVETTED FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE USA?
Michael-Is-Great,
The CRS memo was first released to the public on this blog.
See
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/11/members-of-congress-memo-what-to-tell.html
Hello Michael,
Yes, while not being widely reported as to the original public release of that document, it was first done via this blog on 5 Nov 2010 with the help of a follower who postal mailed it to Mario who scanned it in and had it posted. The contributor has asked to remain anonymous and has asked to be referred to as 'Tom Deacon'. Thank you Tom. Here is the link to the original public release of that CRS document:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/11/members-of-congress-memo-what-to-tell.html
Another key point, the lack of vetting by anyone, agency, group, or institution during the election process is a key argument in our original complaint. While this newly uncovered document by the CRS proves our point, many, many things seem to get rediscovered over time that we have in our complaint filed with the court in Jan 2009. See this outline of our case and the page numbers which discuss the lack of vetting of Obama in 2008.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19914488/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-DOC-00-Table-of-Contents-2nd-Amended-Complaint
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner et al v Obama et al
P.S. Please donate to help the cause if you can. Thank you.
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Post a Comment