Of the birthers, that is.
She keeps trying, and she keeps getting shot down again and again. This week she got hit twice.
First was the substantive decision on one of her bogus cases challenging Obama’s qualifications to be president. She had filed a complaint in federal court and a request for a preliminary injunction to protect a military doctor from going to Iraq, and the court not only denied the injunction, the court dismissed the case. In a fourteen page decision the judge eviscerates her and her client:
First, Plaintiff’s challenge to her deployment order is frivolous. She has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations and conjecture that President Obama is ineligible to serve as President of the United States. Instead, she uses her Complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the President is “an illegal usurper, an
unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.” (Compl. ¶ 21.) She continues with bare, conclusory allegations that the President is “an alien, possibly even an unnaturalized or even an unadmitted illegal alien . . . without so much as lawful residency in the United States.” (Id. ¶ 26.)
He goes further, and this is very unusual, ordering that
I was first admitted to practice in federal court almost thirty years ago, and I know that I would take it seriously if I got an order like this. What does Orly do?
First, she goes out and attacks the judge, his judicial integrity, and his independence. “Somebody should consider trying [the judge] for treason and aiding and abetting this massive fraud known as Barack Hussein Obama.”
“This is so outrageous what this judge did — it goes in the face of law and order,” said Taitz, reached at her office in Mission Viego, CA. “Not every judge is as corrupt as Judge Land. Some judges believe in the Constitution. And some judges believe in the rule of law.”
“Listen, Nelson Mandela stayed in prison for years in order to get to the truth and justice.”
And Taitz brushed off the possibility of sanctions. “I’m not afraid of sanctions. Because I know this is not frivolous. I know this is extremely important — the most important issue in this country today.”
“Judge Land is a typical puppet of the regime — just like in the Soviet Union,” she said.
Then, she goes back to the same judge and asks him, pretty please, to change his mind:
Smart litigation tactic? Maybe not.
“It was deja vu all over again.”
Simply, put the motion is frivolous. Moreover, the Court further finds that Plaintiff’s motion is being presented for the improper purpose of using the federal judiciary as a platform to espouse controversial political beliefs rather than as
a legitimate forum for hearing legal claims. Counsel’s conduct violates Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and sanctions are warranted. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 15) is denied, and counsel for Plaintiff is ordered to show cause why the Court should not impose a monetary
penalty of $10,000.00 upon Plaintiff’s counsel for her misconduct.
So what’s the point here? Well, I guess there are a couple.
First is the utter pointlessness of this argument. Nobody with a brain takes this argument seriously. Every judge the claim has been presented to has rejected it in one way or another.
The second may be even more important. Orly Taitz really is the best and the brightest. She is absolutely the smartest thing they’ve got going over in Birther-Land.
I know, reading the Taitz dispatches is like susbsisting on a diet of M&M’s. Not nutritious, they won’t sustain you over the long haul, but it’s hard to not grab that one next M, isn’t it?
The client she claimed to represent in this particular case did not authorize her to file the followup, and has now filed a complaint against her. http://washingtonindependent.c…
I have a feeling Taitz will be disbarred in the not-too-distant future, due to her utter lack of understanding of law and the legal system.
She presents in place of legal arguments is kind of like reading the labels on Dr. Bronner’s soap. Not really a surprise, given she got her “law degree” from an online law school (Taft University).
Let’s hope she’s a better dentist than lawyer….
aren’t these (some of) the same people who complain about trial lawyers and scream for tort reform?
Taitz resides on the other side of the rabbit hole…
can’t wait to hear how she responds to the judge’s ruling that she show cause as to why she shouldn’t be sanctioned