Obama Citizenship

Schneller v. Cortes: Distributed for SCOTUS Conference

By Phil

A concerned Pennsylvania citizen and the pro se Plaintiff in Schneller v. Cortes, James Schneller had originally brought a suit against his Secretary of the Commonwealth, Pedro Cortes, alleging that Pennsylvania?s certified ballots were improperly transmitted to the federal government due to a stay of such activity and that Sen. Arlen Specter had been improperly placed as an Elector for the McCain/Palin ticket. His application for stay had originally been denied by Associate Justice Souter back on January 8, 2009 (docket).

According to the case’s current docket (also referenced via my “Supreme Court Info” widget on the sidebar, to the right (scroll down)), on June 3, the case was “DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 18, 2009,” whereby the Supreme Court Justices will consider whether or not to grant the case cert.

What does this mean? Here’s a brief overview of a Writ of Certiorari (via Wikipedia):

Four of the nine Justices are required to grant a writ of certiorari, referred to as the “rule of four.” The great majority of cases brought to the Supreme Court are denied certiorari (approximately 7,500 petitions are presented each year, but just 80 to 150 are typically granted), because the Supreme Court is generally careful to choose only cases in which it has jurisdiction and which it considers sufficiently important (especially cases involving deep constitutional questions) to merit the use of its limited resources. See also Cert pool.

The granting of a writ does not necessarily mean that the Supreme Court has found anything wrong with the decision of the lower court. Granting a writ of certiorari means merely that four of the Justices think that the circumstances described in the petition are sufficient to warrant the full Court reviewing the case and the lower court’s action. Conversely, the legal effect of the Supreme Court’s denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari is commonly misunderstood as meaning that the Supreme Court approves the decision of a lower court. However, such a denial “imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case, as the bar has been told many times.” Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70 (1995). In particular, a denial of a writ of certiorari means that no binding precedent is created, and that the lower court’s decision is authoritative only within its region of jurisdiction.

There is further historical information available concerning what happens during a Supreme Court Conference. Be aware that there is no way for anyone, including SCOTUS Clerks, to know what transpired during a Conference; in the past, certain individuals have tried to spread rumors saying they knew so-and-so who clerked for such-and-such a Justice and they said blah. The truth of the matter is, that really is all they know — blah!

How do we know what the Conference’s decision is? This will be revealed via the 2008 Term Court Orders page. Based on past history, the Order to grant or deny Cert could occur at any time, but could be as late as Friday, 6/19 or potentially Monday, 6/22. Further, grantings and denials have occurred on any given day, so there’s really no absolute pattern for when Orders occur.

Update: Mr. Schneller had the following to say regarding his case:

Dear citizen who is horrified by events in Washington,

This is a news item that concerns our Supreme Court’s fourth chance to address the Obama birth certificate issue.  I wrote most of you in January, at a prior turning point.  Because you are a concerned citizen, you have to know about this, and I hope you’ll share it with your friends and family and pastor.  This is not a request for donation.

I have filed a supplementary brief in the Supreme Court of the United States in Case No. 08-9797 objecting to the failure of Barack Obama to file an answer, and requesting that the Supreme Court enable  newer evidence in the Obama birth issue.   The Supreme Court has set this case for a conference on June 18th.

I filed the appeal on April 6, 2009, asking reversal of denial of my petition for injunction filed in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in December of 2008.  That petition requested a delay of the tally by the Pennsylvania electoral college, because the ballots of the Pennsylvania electors had been unlawfully finalized despite the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s erroneous and fraudulent certifying of the ballot to all County officials, without any examination, nor investigation, of the eligibility and qualification of Barack Obama for the office of President of the United States.

Why are all the cases in this issue filed by concerned citizens , rather than organizations ?  To my belief, many firms believe it to be futile, and most of the others have been warned against it. (see the article following this letter)  The fact that only citizens have sued does not mean that a Court, at some time or other, could decide to address this issue.

In my suit I am demanding that the Secretary of the Commonwealth perform his duty, as was required, by requiring Obama to prove that he is a natural born citizen.  I claim that the Secretary had ample time to demand proofs from Obama in December, before the vote was certified and delivered to the Electoral College.

I also am objecting that the Pennsylvania election law makes the Office of the President of the United States exempt from the requirement that candidates file an affidavit swearing that they are eligible for office.  I’ve asked the Justices to declare that this 2006 amendment is arbitrary and unconstitutional.  (Anyone so inclined – please check your state’s election law for this type of amendment and email me any findings !)

I raise new material in the brief in order to encourage the Supreme Court to address the gaping absence of eligibility of our head of state:

- Obama’s recent, biased, dropping of the suit against certain Philadelphia Black Panther members for voter intimidation,

- recent ill-conceived “stimulus” awards to ACORN and efforts to make ACORN a census participant,

- recent White House efforts to create unprecedented levels of security around common documents that are normally available to the public.

- national celebrations and official proclamations in the Nation of Kenya, on the basis of Obama’s  birthplace being there !

- the fact that the United States Attorney General avoided several opportunities to investigate substantial complaints presented against ACORN during the 2008 campaign, despite ample time and manpower available,

- the White House’s unpredicted and unconstitutional policy of doubling the national debt, nationalizing  decrepit industries, and pardoning violent terrorists, despite the public’s not being made aware of this intent during the campaign.

- the Homeland Security boondoggle alleging that veterans and pro-life citizens are extremists.

- I also claim that Obama was required to answer my petition because he claims to hold the highest office in the land, and must therefore be open with the people rather than clandestine.  Since he didnt answer, he has in essence admitted to all of the allegations made against him.

There is much more, which is why I ask the Court to allow new evidence !  Just last week outrageous news happened :

Obama Fired the U.S. Whistleblower Who Uncovered $$ 75 Million ACORN-type fraud !

The patriots who are continuing to file suits and to blog, newsletter, and report the case against Obama for his clear cut illegal acts are greater in number now, and you may want to check some of the websites at intervals.  This story about huge government fraud is a news item carried by Judicial Watch, which is a respected watchdog organization, who recently began to actively cover Obama in respect to his constant illegal behavior.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2009/jun/obama-fires-ig-who-exposed-supporter-s-fraud

Help Make Prosecution Happen

Since the Supreme Court case is up for Court Conference on Thursday, I hope you’ll be able to offer prayers or a moment of silence, and to make serious talk at work and leisure, to impress all with the hard truth of our new government.  I firmly believe in an ability granted by the Creator, for America to rise, despite great odds, above this unnatural situation, and to redirect our Republic onto a positive and moral path, rather than a descent to oblivion.

See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:

• Obama?s Presidential Eligibility: What You Need to Know
• Obama’s Sealed Background Documentation
• Obama Citizenship Facts
• Sen. Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) Natural Born Citizen Resolution (April 10, 2008)
• Citizen Grand Jury Updates and Eligibility Lawsuit Listing

-Phil

Note: I’ll be going on vacation beginning this Friday through to the end of next week; I will , however, have dial-up access and will be monitoring my site from time to time. I’ll be posting a “best-of” posting by Friday of this week as a reminder of this fact.

Full post as published by The Right Side of Life on June 15, 2009 (boomark / email).