Barnett v. Obama, the last birther case filed by Orly Taitz that hasn’t been dismissed has, well, been dismissed:
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter has dismissed Barnett et al v. Obama et al, Orly Taitz’s most successful lawsuit — that is, the one that got the furthest through the legal system — demanding proof of the president’s citizenship
The outcome isn’t surprising, but after reading the order (which is embedded below), it’s clear why Judge Carter too three weeks to release this; he wanted an airtight order that gives Orly Taitz no grounds for appeal.
The best part is Section F, which Cater titled “Conduct Of Plaintiff’s counsel” and it deserves to be quoted in full:
The hearings have been interesting to say the least. Plaintiffs’ arguments through Taitz have generally failed to aid the Court. Instead, Plaintiffs’ counsel has favored rhetoric seeking to arouse the emotions and prejudices of her followers rather than the language of a lawyer seeking to present arguments through cogent legal reasoning. While the Court has no desire to chill Plaintiffs’ enthusiastic presentation, Taitz’s argument often hampered the efforts of her cocounsel Gary Kreep (“Kreep”), counsel for Plaintiffs Drake and Robinson, to bring serious issues before the Court. The Court has attempted to give Plaintiffs a voice and a chance to be heard by respecting their choice of counsel and by making every effort to discern the legal arguments of Plaintiffs’ counsel amongst the rhetoric.
This Court exercised extreme patience when Taitz endangered this case being heard at all by failing to properly file and serve the complaint upon Defendants and held multiple hearings to ensure that the case would not be dismissed on the technicality of failure to effect service. While the original complaint in this matter was filed on January 20, 2009, Defendants were not properly served until August 25, 2009. Taitz successfully served Defendants only after the Court intervened on several occasions and requested that defense counsel make significant accommodations for her to effect service. Taitz also continually refused to comply with court rules and procedure. Taitz even asked this Court to recuse Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato on the basis that he required her to comply with the Local Rules. See Order Denying Pls.’ Mot. For Modification of Mag. J. Nakazato’s Aug. 6, 2009, Order; Denying Pls.’ Mot. to Recuse Mag. J. Nakazato; and Granting Ex Parte App. for Order Vacating Voluntary Dismissal (Sep. 8, 2009). Taitz also attempted to dismiss two of her clients against their wishes because she did not want to work with their new counsel. See id.
Taitz encouraged her supporters to contact this Court, both via letters and phone calls. It was improper and unethical for her as an attorney to encourage her supporters to attempt to influence this Court’s decision. Despite these attempts to manipulate this Court, the Court has not considered any outside pleas to influence the Court’s decision.
Additionally, the Court has received several sworn affidavits that Taitz asked potential witnesses that she planned to call before this Court to perjure themselves. This Court is deeply concerned that Taitz may have suborned perjury through witnesses she intended to bring before this Court.
While the Court seeks to ensure that all interested parties have had the opportunity to be heard, the Court cannot condone the conduct of Plaintiffs’ counsel in her efforts to influence this Court.
Does this mean we can expect a Show Cause Order from Judge Carter in the near future asking Orly to explain why she shouldn’t be sanctioned again ? I’d say the odds are pretty good.
And then, there’s the closing paragraph of the Order:
Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by “We the People”–over sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.
This is bound to set the birthers off just because of all the faith they’ve been putting in the case. Should be fun to watch.
Full order below:
October 29th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Looks like Judge Carter’s dismissal of Orly,s suit is her combination Stalingrad and El Alamein; the beginning of the end. I hope Judge Carter imposes sanctions against her. The sooner she disappears back into the woodwork, the better it will be for everyone.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
I can’t understand why she has not been disbarred. I can’t understand why her colleagues are not up in arms to kick her out of the California bar. Orly is completely unprofessional, ignorant of American laws and disrespectful of the courts and judiciary process. I have never seen anything like this and I can’t understand the latitude she has received from the courts. I even think the $20K in fines were meager change after the spectacle she created after Judge Land’s decision.
I hope we can see an end to her “lawyer” career very, very soon.
October 30th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Can someone please tell me why a judge would say something about the popular vote in a presidential election? Seems kinda friggin’ stupid to me. Maybe he should read the rules for electing a president somewhere. I am not a judge, but it seems to me that I remember something about an electoral college or some other kinda nonsense being the way that we elect a president.
October 30th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Virtually all of the digs at the unconventionalism of Orly Taitz could have been lodged against Thurgood Marshall in 1953. She is a breath of fresh air who is pointing out repeatedly the timidity of the legal guild and the princes in the judiciary in enforcing one of the simplist of all consititutional requirements.
Ms. Taitz should be lauded, not fined or punished, for her efforts.
Strong, free-thinking, independent women don’t have much of a chance on this blog. Whatever happened to the notions of liberty and tolerance espoused by Locke and others?
October 30th, 2009 at 11:37 am
You’re joking right ?
Thurgood Marshall was not only a better lawyer than Orly Taitz can ever pretend to be, he actually had the facts and the law on his side.
Orly’s a joke. Her followers are potentially the beginnings of a dangerous mob
October 30th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
What does attempting to suborn perjury have to do with being a strong, free thinking independent woman? Encouraging such actions is your idea of “tolerance”? Goodness.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
I’ve been fascinated with the birther phenomenon from the beginning. It’s frightening that such a large segment of the population is so out of touch with reality. However, listening to their speculation about how there would have to be a new election, all of Obama’s appointments would have to be rescinded, etc., did have a high degree of entertainment value. If there’s one thing I’ve learned about the birthers, it’s that they will carry the belief that Obama is an illegitimate President to their graves. If reality doesn’t suit them, they simply ignore it. I don’t blame the rest of the world for laughing at us; I just wish we could hide them in the basement. Hey wait, don’t we have some underground FEMA camps somewhere?
November 1st, 2009 at 4:08 pm
I think the authorities are treating Taitz with kid gloves because they don’t want the appearance of persecuting a political opponent of the President. Under any other set of circumstances I think Taitz would be in prison by now. Ironically, Taitz doesn’t recognize that she’s being treated with such bend-over-backwards forbearance. Rather, she believes she’s being persecuted by “the regime.”
But at this point she’s forcing the hands of “the system.” I believe they’re on the cusp of coming down on her like a ton of bricks. When the feds focus on her; when zealous, motivated and perhaps angry federal prosecutors focus on her, she can kiss her life goodbye. And, no, birther nincompoops are not going to break her out of federal prison nor will they take to the streets on her behalf. She’ll simply be forgotten.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:05 pm
It’s not a large segment, heavyhitter, it’s deadenders who can’t stand the idea of a black man in the white house. Of course,they want you to believe it’s lots of them. That’s why if you check out any I Hate President Obama website, you will see the same 5 people postig over and over and over ….