October 29, 2009 /

Another Orly Taitz Suit Thrown Out

And this time it is the one of her many suits that got the furthest. The ruling is a slam in the face to Taitz and the whole birther movement. I love this part here: Interpreting the Constitution is a serious and crucial task with which the federal courts of this nation have been entrusted […]

And this time it is the one of her many suits that got the furthest. The ruling is a slam in the face to Taitz and the whole birther movement. I love this part here:

Interpreting the Constitution is a serious and crucial task with which the federal courts of this nation have been entrusted under Article III. However, that very same Constitution puts limits on the reach of the federal courts. One of those limits is that the Constitution defines processes through which the President can be removed from office. The Constitution does not include a role for the Court in that process. 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‚ 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. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.

Perhaps its time to start questioning the validity of Taitz’s law license?

More IntoxiNation

Comments