Constitutionality of Obama's Actions

[Capt Caveman]

Judge should be removed from duty.

 

[Capt Caveman]

The US lost their constitution long ago. It's just a very rough set of guidelines that should possibly maybe be considered thinking of being followed by the government. I doubt the government even knows what the constitution is or cares about finding out. They just do whatever they want. 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.

Wow, not only are you ignorant but you're stupid. Do some research and write a paper on dictatorships, you actually might learn something.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Captain AMerica . THE rest of the world thinks much like he does . They think Americans are OK but they hate our government . Most also think we are sleeping to let happen to us what happened.
Ya see Capy AMERICA on Jan 1 the president signed a bill. That removed Alot of our rights and liberties . But like so many Americans feel they can sleep better now . But a very large number of Americans went out and bought guns so they could feel better. and protect themselves from the gooberment

 

[wayond]

No, because he hasn't done anything unconstitutional. They're just blowing smoke out their asses, as usual.

 

[dank69]

Orly?

 

[classy]

Lets cut right to the chase shall we. This judge is a complete idiot trying to grab 15 minutes of fame. In this particular case, there is no reason to subpoena the president. If there is an issue with his birth certificate, then for something such as this, his personal presence is not needed. This is not about being above law or checks and balances. This is about a person wanting to grab some attention.

 

[Darwin333]

This president, like the last, doesn't really care about the constitution. In regard to this case, at some point you need to just tell judges to piss off in his case because in theory an unlimited number of them can come up with this crap and screw his productivity up.

I have been subpoenaed before and I had no clue that "screwing my productivity up", which they all did, was a valid excuse to ignore it. I wonder how well that would go over if I decided to use that excuse?

 

[Darwin333]

Judge got ODS. Executive privilege is the only treatment.

Ok, I admit that I am not very knowledgable on exactly what Executive privilege is but from the wiki article:

In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government. The concept of executive privilege is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine, and/or derived from the supremacy of executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[1]

The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns.

 

[Darwin333]

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.



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:

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.

Please forgive my ignorance but I am trying to learn something new and I thank you for the above post. Could you clarify a few things for me?

1. Are you saying that lawyers can, on their own and with no judicial involvement, issue subpoenas and they are different than a court or judge issued subpoena?

2. If the above is correct, I assume that a lawyer can not compel you to show up in court so any subpoena that they issue isn't really the "you must show up or else" type of subpoena? Are their different names for the ones issued by courts that are the "or else" types?

3. If I understand you correctly, if a person (regardless if its me or the President of the United States) ignores a subpoena issued by a lawyer the lawyer can then bring it to a judge who, if he determines that it has enough merit, then issues a court subpoena (the "or else" type)?

4. Would a lay person like myself be able to tell the difference between the two subpoenas?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

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.

Obama was not served with a subpoena and in any case a state subpoena applies only to the residents of that state. One might be able to enforce a subpoena on a Georgia resident outside of the state in some circumstances but otherwise no. This is a long established principle. It isn't a matter of Obama not obeying a subpoena, it's a matter that the demand to appear isn't valid to begin with. This is a state administrative court, not a federal one.

Edit: There are a few exceptions however from Blake vs. Blake-

Can an out-of-state resident be compelled to come to Georgia for the purpose of a deposition being taken when no subpoena for such was served upon the party in Georgia?
We reverse the trial court and hold that an out-of-state resident cannot be compelled to come to Georgia for the purpose of taking a deposition.

http://www.lawskills.com/case/ga/id/451/4/index.html

 

[jstern01]

I am pretty sure, that state courts can not issue valid subpoenas for elect members of the federal government that are also not residents of said state. From what I have read, the only time subpoenas issued against the office of the president have been from Federal Courts and above (SCOTUS).

Some interesting history regarding attempts to subpoena the president.

United States v. Cooper
United States v. Burr
Marbury v. Madison
United States v. Nixon

Basic take away from this, is that State courts do not have the jurisdiction to subpoena the president, as any Federal court would most likely squash the subpoena based upon previous rulings.

 

[woolfe9999]

Given that executive privilege isn't actually in the constitution I'm not sure how this argument explains the constitutionality of the president's actions. Even so, it would appear that the prosecutors have done their part by showing "that the Presidential material is essential to the justice of the case." One step further, if you don't think that is still the case, the attorneys for the defense didn't even show up either, let alone Obama himself.

Bottom line, the executive privileged defense doesn't seem to hold water given the fact that there wasn't even anyone at the trial for the defense to argue it. Also, it doesn't appear that the defense even tried to use it in this case, instead they just flipped the entire judicial branch the bird.

Executive privilege is a rule made by the SCOTUS. Didn't you start off the thread saying the POTUS is "thumbing his nose at the judicial branch"?

I don't actually know if executive privilege applies here because it is complex and case specific. I'm just linking it because most likely that is what Obama's people are relying on here.

Edit: just caught up on the rest of the thread. LOL, fail thread is fail.

 

[Matt1970]

I am one of the people that wanted to see his long form. I saw it. He's a US Citizen born in Hawaii. Get over it.

 

[xBiffx]

Executive privilege is a rule made by the SCOTUS. Didn't you start off the thread saying the POTUS is "thumbing his nose at the judicial branch"?

I don't actually know if executive privilege applies here because it is complex and case specific. I'm just linking it because most likely that is what Obama's people are relying on here.

Edit: just caught up on the rest of the thread. LOL, fail thread is fail.

Thanks for your input woolfe. I would think there would be more on the executive privilege aspect but it hasn't been brought up by the Obama defense yet. I can't figure out why. My only thought is that perhaps they don't think it would apply either since its a personal matter at hand.

The thread has gone to fail because there are too many people just throwing in one liners about the case and not addressing the issue at the heart of the discussion. Too many people think that the merits of a case get to let someone decide if they ignore court authority. Anyone of us in here would not be able to thumb our nose at a court like this, and unless executive privileged is indeed applicable here it doesn't seem like the president should be able to either.

 

[xBiffx]

I am one of the people that wanted to see his long form. I saw it. He's a US Citizen born in Hawaii. Get over it.

I don't disagree but there are laws in Georgia that allow citizens to question the qualifications of a candidate. They want to see the documents first hand and it appears the laws allow for that. Guess we will see what the judge decides on Feb. 5, the supposed date of the eventual ruling.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Anyone of us in here would not be able to thumb our nose at a court like this, and unless executive privileged is indeed applicable here it doesn't seem like the president should be able to either.

You ignored the Georgia legal precedent I posted. Because one state issues a subpoena does not mean a non citizen must comply. There is no need to appeal to executive privilege when the legal basis for the subpoena does not exist. You could tell them to go pound sand as well. There is no criminal proceeding here which would allow for extradition. The judge might as well try to haul Christ into court.

 

[hal2kilo]

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.

That Bxxxh Taitz is Bat shit crazy.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

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

Kick his arse...

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I don't disagree but there are laws in Georgia that allow citizens to question the qualifications of a candidate. They want to see the documents first hand and it appears the laws allow for that. Guess we will see what the judge decides on Feb. 5, the supposed date of the eventual ruling.

You've had your arse handed to you three ways to sunday and still you persist.

The Obamanic hatred in you is stong, perhaps you should be turned into a Newt.

 

[Wreckem]

I don't disagree but there are laws in Georgia that allow citizens to question the qualifications of a candidate. They want to see the documents first hand and it appears the laws allow for that. Guess we will see what the judge decides on Feb. 5, the supposed date of the eventual ruling.

States do NOT have the right to question the validity of another states birth records. Per the constitution states are supposed to give full faith and credit to other states records.

Hawaii has said Obama was born there. There is a certified birth certificate from Hawaii, that has been confirmed by the govt of Hawaii as being valid. Georgia by the Constitution is to respect that as being a vaild birth certificate because Hawaii says it is a vaild birth certificate.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

States do NOT have the right to question the validity of another states birth records. Per the constitution states are supposed to give full faith and credit to other states public records.

Hawaii has produced Obama's birth certificate. Georgia by the Constitution is to respect that as being a vaild birth certificate because Hawaii says it is a vaild birth certificate.

Of course they don't, but they could get the SC to issue a federal order.

The issue has been settled once and TWICE, though so it's not going to happen.

I just hope that this isn't a one time thing, it's brought much amusement to the rest of the world so please continue with the next president.

Yours truly... the rest of the world laughing at the republicans who have not politic but do have opposition to everything that they'd even suggest if they were in office.

It's laughable and detrimental to your nation but hey, you like it and to each their own.

 

[Ausm]

You gotta love those Birthers!

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

You gotta love those Birthers!

If there was a unit that was the complete opposite of the Delta Force, they'd be members of that team.

 

[Siddhartha]

Forgive me for this being off topic. But I enjoy reading these anti-Obama threads. I let them go for a couple of pages and then savor reading the OP and the forum's other anti-Obama no matter crowd get it handed to them.

Thanks for the enjoyment!

 

[Red Squirrel]

Wow, not only are you ignorant but you're stupid. Do some research and write a paper on dictatorships, you actually might learn something.

No, you're just ignorant to the fact that your government is ignoring you, and doing only what it wants, to please itself. They are above the law, and have placed themselves there, and will continue to push the limits.