Constitutionality of Obama's Actions

[JohnOfSheffield]

So you insult me, claim ignorance, and then ask me to help you understand something? I'm not sure how things work where you are but that's not the way to go about finding out about something here.

To your question, since apparently we haven't lost all civility in the U.S. so I will answer it, a judge can subpoena anyone they want given the proper justification. The President isn't above the law. The only thing protected for the President is anything regarding his official duties as president. This doesn't seem to fit that description since its a personal matter and not protected.

That wasn't what i asked, i asked about this specific case.

Either you don't know and you say that or you do know and you make an absolute statement, what are you? A US liberal weasel or something?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Do you understand that this was an administrative hearing? Obama wasn't a defendant. Orly Taitz filed on behalf of her client to have Obama testify on behalf of her client. The judge just didn't quash the thing. He has no authority to issue such order.

Please do some research before you rage on. This whole thing is stupid.

Thank you...

Well, xBiffx, seems like you were out fishing in a sandpit.

 

[xBiffx]

So challenging Obama's birth in court something that hasen't been done for any Presidential candidate, not even McCain who wasn't born on US soil is just a big fat coincidence? It has absolutely nothing to do with him being black?

Since Hawaii certified his birth if these knuckleheads were really concerned about the country their suit would be aimed at the state of Hawaii. If the certificate is illigitimate you go after the issuer not the issuee.

Presidents cannot be sued for any actions taken while in office, only for actions they took or failed to take before assuming office. Again if this was a legitimate issue Hawaii would be the defendant.

You missed the point of this discussion as it was quite clear not to turn this into a birther issue but rather discuss the president's decision to ignore subpoenas. Comprehension fail.

Your statement in bold is again totally false. You chose not to site something to back it up like I asked but rather just repeat it. A President can be sued for anything outside of their Presidential duties. If, (and this is totally hypothetical :sneaky for example, the President were to be out golfing and injured another golfer while swinging his club, he could easily be sued for it if it was his fault. Anything outside of his presidential duties is fair game.

 

[HomerJS]

Do you understand that this was an administrative hearing? Obama wasn't a defendant. Orly Taitz filed on behalf of her client to have Obama testify on behalf of her client. The judge just didn't quash the thing. He has no authority to issue such order.

Please do some research before you rage on. This whole thing is stupid.

I don't give a rats ass if it was a hearing. The underlying premise of it was challenging the legitimacy of a document legally issued by the state of Hawaii. Judge has every right to throw it out.

And you are right this entire birther thing is stupid. Well as the great Forrest Gump once uttered "stupid is as..."

 

[xBiffx]

Do you understand that this was an administrative hearing? Obama wasn't a defendant. Orly Taitz filed on behalf of her client to have Obama testify on behalf of her client. The judge just didn't quash the thing. He has no authority to issue such order.

Please do some research before you rage on. This whole thing is stupid.

Obama is the defendant in this case, you should do your own homework. The plaintiffs are arguing that he shouldn't be allowed on the Georgia ballot and his lawyers are trying to stop this. Who is the defendant if not Obama and his lawyers? Obama was subpoenaed to show documentation and testimony that proves he is eligible for the Georgia ballot.

To the bold point. How does a judge not have authority to issue and/or revoke a subpoena?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Obama is the defendant in this case, you should do your own homework. The plaintiffs are arguing that he shouldn't be allowed on the Georgia ballot and his lawyers are trying to stop this. Who is the defendant if not Obama and his lawyers? Obama was subpoenaed to show documentation and testimony that proves he is eligible for the Georgia ballot.

To the bold point. How does a judge not have authority to issue and/or revoke a subpoena?

Glad you asked. Let me demonstrate and I hope you will actually read and comprehend and not just react. The challenge is against the Secretary of State, not Obama directly. It's basically a challenge that the SoS did not follow the law in including Obama on the ballot.

The matter is before the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings (OSAH).

Georgia Code, Title 50, Chapter 13, Article 2 clarifies their authority as such.

§ 50-13-40. Office created; chief state administrative law judge


(a) There is created within the executive branch of state government the Office of State Administrative Hearings. The office shall be independent of state administrative agencies and shall be responsible for impartial administration of administrative hearings in accordance with this article. The office shall be assigned for administrative purposes only, as that term is defined in Code Section 50-4-3, to the Department of Administrative Services.

See, the authority is strictly limited to an office or agency of the executive branch. In this case the Secretary of State.

Now, Georgia Code Title 50, Chapter 13, Article 1 outlays general provisions. Specifically about subpoenas it states:

(7) Subpoenas shall be issued without discrimination between public and private parties. When a subpoena is disobeyed, any party may apply to the superior court of the county where the contested case is being heard for an order requiring obedience. Failure to comply with such order shall be cause for punishment as for contempt of court. The costs of securing the attendance of witnesses, including fees and mileage, shall be computed and assessed in the same manner as prescribed by law in civil cases in the superior court;

Subpoenas are issued between parties, not by the OHAS. If someone doesn't obey a subpoena, any party can contest it to the superior court to have it ordered that they should comply. In this case the judge declined to quash the subpoena. That is all. Nothing has been contested to the superior court at this point. The superior court has issued no orders.

Now, the judge in this case will not issue a ruling. He will forward a recommendation which will either be implemented or rejected within 30 days by a reviewing agency. Basically he will issue findings of fact, conclusions of law and a recommended disposition of the case. The SoS is not compelled to implement anything forwarded to him.​

Edit: as I said earlier, it was Orly Taitz who sent the subpoena to Obama to testify, on behalf of Farrara, her client who is challenging the SoS on Obama's eligibility.

 

[Anarchist420]

Even if he wasn't born in the United States, that would be the least of my complaints against him.

However, I'm pretty sure he was born in the United States.

 

[Jhhnn]

That'd all be peachy, except he hasn't actually been subpoenaed-

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/23/1057570/-No!!-Obama-has-NOT-been-subpoenaed!

Birthers & hangers-on pounce on sloppy journalism...

 

[xBiffx]

That'd all be peachy, except he hasn't actually been subpoenaed-

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/23/1057570/-No!!-Obama-has-NOT-been-subpoenaed!

Birthers & hangers-on pounce on sloppy journalism...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78807773/...uce-Georgia-Ballot-Access-Challenge-1-19-2012

Here is the judges order referencing the subpoena.

http://www.art2superpac.com/UserFil...ontoQuashSubpoenas,GeorgiaBallotChallenge.pdf

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That'd all be peachy, except he hasn't actually been subpoenaed-

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/23/1057570/-No!!-Obama-has-NOT-been-subpoenaed!

Birthers & hangers-on pounce on sloppy journalism...

Well that's that.

 

[shortylickens]

Not that I'm sticking up for Obama or anything (cuz I hate his guts) but since when do we care if the president follows the constitution?
Most of our past several presidents have been evil, felonious bastards.

 

[Jhhnn]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78807773/...uce-Georgia-Ballot-Access-Challenge-1-19-2012

Here is the judges order referencing the subpoena.

http://www.art2superpac.com/UserFil...ontoQuashSubpoenas,GeorgiaBallotChallenge.pdf

Dimness. From the Kos article-

-- The GA administrative court system has their subpoena form on their website.

-- Orly downloaded the GA subpoena form and issued "subpoenas" to everyone in creation, except for the Pope, Newt, and my black-and-tan hound dawg.

The Judge didn't actually issue the subpoena, Orly Taitz did...

 

[xBiffx]

Dimness. From the Kos article-



The Judge didn't actually issue the subpoena, Orly Taitz did...

I think the other attorney for the prosecution did but in any event a subpoena has to be signed by the court or an officer of the court. It's not like she can just go around and send subpoena's to everyone without this signature/approval. Pretty sure that would be on many sites other than the Daily Kos considering she could probably get disbarred for that.

 

[Jhhnn]

I think the other attorney for the prosecution did but in any event a subpoena has to be signed by the court or an officer of the court. It's not like she can just go around and send subpoena's to everyone without this signature/approval. Pretty sure that would be on many sites other than the Daily Kos considering she could probably get disbarred for that.

Oh, For Goodness Sake-

http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=20882#more-20882

Read it.

 

[xBiffx]

Oh, For Goodness Sake-

http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=20882#more-20882

Read it.

Yeah so she did issue it after all.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77851743/...-Parte-Motion-Reciprocal-Subpoena-Enforcement

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Yeah so she did issue it after all.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77851743/...-Parte-Motion-Reciprocal-Subpoena-Enforcement

Did issue what?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Yeah so she did issue it after all.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77851743/...-Parte-Motion-Reciprocal-Subpoena-Enforcement

Did you even read what you just posted?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Did you even read what you just posted?

Being a state issue there is no legal obligation for Hawaii to respond to Taitz. At that point the request can be reviewed which will be laughed out by Alabama.

Oh, as you say I wonder just why that was posted. It has nothing to do with Obama or any federal entity.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Being a state issue there is no legal obligation for Hawaii to respond to Taitz. At that point the request can be reviewed which will be laughed out by Alabama.

Thank you, that's clarifies that issue, so basically, this has nothing to do with Obama being sued.

Oh, as you say I wonder just why that was posted. It has nothing to do with Obama or any federal entity.

Yeah, i skimmed it and then read it more thoroughly and it seemed to me like it was out of place and had nothing to do with Obama at all and definitely not supportive of the OP's assessment.

 

[umbrella39]

The OP swings and misses again. WTG!

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

The OP swings and misses again. WTG!

I don't think he missed, i think he got a perfect hit... Right on his own nose.

 

[dmcowen674]

The US lost their constitution long ago.

They're a dictatorship and have been for quite a long time.

Anything that benefits them, they'll do, anything that benefits the people, they wont do.

I'm just glad I don't live there.

This

From the outside you see it.

Americans don't see it.

It's a Dictatorship under the name of two parties owned by a select few wealthy Corporate CEO's and retired CEO's.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

This

From the outside you see it.

Americans don't see it.

It's a Dictatorship under the name of two parties owned by a select few wealthy Corporate CEO's and retired CEO's.

I disagree, it is a democracy, unfortunately you forgot to institute the most important principle, which is shared democracy.

Rest of the west have it, the US doesn't... hey RabidMongrel, how is that done in Iceland?

 

[xBiffx]

Being a state issue there is no legal obligation for Hawaii to respond to Taitz. At that point the request can be reviewed which will be laughed out by Alabama.

Oh, as you say I wonder just why that was posted. It has nothing to do with Obama or any federal entity.

The subpoena that was issued by Taitz is legal and was granted and signed by an officer of the court in Hawaii. She then filed a ex parte motion so that she could get the subpoena to take affect faster for the purpose of getting information before the court date today. This was also granted by the court. As such the subpoena is legal and binding.

What does a federal entity have anything to do with this? The State of Hawaii isn't the one being subpoenaed, the Secretary of State is as was Obama who is also named as a defendant in the case. Regardless of their status, this is a legal subpoena and the court has the authority to enforce it.

How many documents saying "Obama...Defendant" does it take before you realize he is a defendant and this has everything to do with him? I am still not quite sure about your federal entity comment. None is required. Its not like you can just ignore a subpoena because its from a court in a different state.

Anyways I don't think the issue has been with the Taitz subpoena as it was addressed to the Secretary of State of Hawaii. The issue seems to be with failure to show according to the ruling and the documents I posted earlier.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78807773/S...enge-1-19-2012
http://www.art2superpac.com/UserFil...ontoQuashSubpoenas,GeorgiaBallotChallenge.pdf

In the second document, the Judge references "the subpoena" several times as well as the defense's motion to quash it. That's a lot of back and forth about something that the Daily Kos says doesn't exit. So Obama, it seems, was indeed subpoenaed.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Maybe you want to look at that link one more time.