Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/10562711/Lightfoot-v-Bowen-No-08A524
Timestamp: 2015-07-05 16:23:16
Document Index: 311550234

Matched Legal Cases: ['§1', '§1', '§1', '§1', '§1', '§1']

P. 1Lightfoot v. Bowen, No. 08A524Lightfoot v. Bowen, No. 08A524Ratings: 5.0 (1)|Views: 873|Likes: 3Published by Juan del SurMOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT, THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENTBARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFY UNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II§1, & AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)I. Motion to file Under Rule 21 (2) (b), and 21(4).MOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT, THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENTBARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFY UNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II§1, & AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)I. Motion to file Under Rule 21 (2) (b), and 21(4).More info:Categories:Types, Government & PoliticsPublished by: Juan del Sur on Jan 17, 2009Copyright:Attribution Non-commercialAvailability:Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate content|Add to collectionSee moreSee lesshttps://www.scribd.com/doc/10562711/Lightfoot-v-Bowen-No-08A52411/18/2012pdftextoriginal Page 1 of 22
No. 08A524In TheSupreme Court of the United StatesGAIL LIGHTFOOT, NEIL B. TURNER, KATHLEEN FLANAGAN,JAMES M. OBERSCHAIN, CAMDEN W. MCCONNELL,PAMELA BARNETT, & EVELYN BRADLEYPetitioners;v.DEBRA BOWEN, Secretary of State of CaliforniaRespondent.On Petition For A Write Of CertiorariBefore Judgment To TheSupreme Court of CaliforniaCase Nos.: (S168690)MOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT,THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENTBARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFYUNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II §1, &AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)Attorney of RecordDr. Orly Taitz, ESQ26302 La PazMission Viejo CA 92691949-683-5411
January 15, 2009QUESTIONS PRESENTEDQuestion I: Does the burden of proof lie with the Petitioner to prove standing and evidence lack of qualification by a candidate/President elect, where election officers rely on a candidate’sdeclaration? OR Does the CONSTITUTION amend. 20 place the burden of proof on thePresident elect to provide objective government certified witnessed proofs, with election officersunder oath to challenge, examine and declare that the President elect has or has not qualified,enforceable by petition for redress of grievances?Question II: Should the “natural born citizen” presidential qualification be interpretedexpansively to expand civil rights under the 14th Amendment? OR Should it be interpretedrestrictively as an essential guard against tyranny by ensuring the Commander in Chief has onlyhad undivided allegiance to the U.S.A., to safeguard the Constitution and the Republic?MOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT, THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENTBARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFY UNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II§1, & AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)I. Motion to file Under Rule 21 (2) (b), and 21(4).The Petitioner requests leave of this Court to file this Motion under Rule 21, (2) (b) whichempowers Petitioner submit “any motion the granting of which would dispose of the entire caseor would affect the final judgment to be entered”. By Rule 21 (4), “the Court may act on amotion without waiting for a response.”To the Petitioner’s knowledge, the following two questions have not been brought to theattention of this Court by the parties or have not been adequately discussed:Question I: Does the burden of proof lie with the Petitioner to prove standing and evidence lack of qualification by a candidate/President elect, where election officers rely on a candidate’sdeclaration? OR Does the CONSTITUTION amend. 20 place the burden of proof on thePresident elect to provide objective government certified witnessed proofs, with election officersunder oath to challenge, examine and declare that the President elect has or has not qualified,enforceable by petition for redress of grievances?Recent events strongly changed the circumstances relating to the Respondent relative to thePetition.A. Respondent declared President electCongress in joint session recorded the Electoral College votes on January 8, 2009. It declaredRespondent Barack Hussein Obama II to be the President elect. This event now brings to bearU.S. CONST. Amendment 20.B. Burden of Proof on RespondentThe clause “have failed to qualify” in U.S. CONST. Amend. 20, place the burden of proof directly on the President elect, the Respondent in this case.C. Respondent has failed to submit proofs
Per the Petitioner’s petition and to his belief and knowledge, the Respondent has to date failed topresent to any constitutional election officer, any government certified proofs attested to byreliable witnesses, for any of the qualifications required under U.S. Const. Art II §1.D. Respondent has hindered discoveryRespondent has actively hindered election officers and We the People from obtaining andexamining proofs of his qualifications for President comprising government certified proofsattested to by reliable witnesses, and certified copies of military, public and educational records.Per the Petitioner’s petition and to her belief and knowledge, the Respondent has, at great cost,systematically opposed in court every effort to require him to provide such proofs, includingthose presented before this Court by the Petitioner.E. President elect has failed to qualify, by default and by opposition.The Petitioner submits that, both by default and by active hindrance to officers and to petitionersseeking that evidence, Respondent, Barack Hussein Obama II, the President Elect, has “failed toqualify” as per U.S. Constitution Amendment 20.F. Immediate Constitutional RemedyIn light of the importance of upholding the CONSTITUTION as supreme law, these changedcircumstances bring Amendment 20 to bear, and because of the very high pubic importance of this matter, Petitioner prays that this Court provide the following immediate constitutionalremedy to better satisfy the prayer of the Petitioner:Find that the President elect has failed to qualify by default, under U.S. CONST. Article II §1 &Amendment 20.This remedy would rely on observation of the Respondents actions of not supplying proofs thathe qualifies, both by omission and commission, rather than on the merits of the Petitioner’s case.The Petitioner’s previous and present prayers may then be molded to communicate that findingto Congress, which then would have constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect aPresident who does qualify.G. Presidential candidates can then qualify.This constitutional remedy would then return to the Electoral College and to Congress theconstitutional duty to elect a President who did qualify from all the available candidates.Question II: Should the “natural born citizen” presidential qualification be interpretedexpansively to expand civil rights under the 14th Amendment? OR Should it be interpretedrestrictively as an essential guard against tyranny by ensuring the Commander in Chief has onlyhad undivided allegiance to the U.S.A., to safeguard the Constitution and the Republic?Petitioner submits an underlying constitutional principle of undivided loyalty to distinguish thestringent qualifications of “natural born citizen” essential for the Commander in Chief for thecommon defense in time of war, and preserving domestic tranquility, versus upholding civilrights of “citizens”.Petitioner appeals to the primacy of upholding the Constitution as inviolable supreme law, andpreserving the essential protection of presidential qualifications to preserve the Republic.Petitioner prays that the Court provide clear guidance on this question of interpreting this criticalqualification of the President elect before the Inauguration on January 20th. This would enableelection officers to examine proofs submitted by the President elect, or on lack thereof, toproperly conduct their constitutional duty to declare that the President elect has qualified, or hasfailed to qualify, before the date of the Inauguration.The Petitioner’s prayer could then be molded to communicate that finding to Congress, whichthen would have constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect a President who does
Activity (5)FiltersAdd to collectionReviewAdd NoteLikeShowingAllMost RecentReviewsAll NotesLikesYou've already reviewed this. Edit your review.Rating 0/5Post notePost reviewPost replyPost note and like1 hundred reads1 thousand readsThomas Rodes liked thisnickname777333 liked thislisaliberi5222 liked thisLoad more
Similar to Lightfoot v. Bowen, No. 08A524Patriots Heart v Soetoro - Petition for Grand JuryJuan del SurSharon Rondeau - Interview With Mario Apuzzo June 9, 2010Juan del SurLeo Donofrio - Dual Cititzen Disqualification IssueJuan del SurJB Williams - The Bottom Line on Natural Born CitizenJuan del SurDouglas Vogt - Affidavit About White House False StatementsJuan del SurOrly Taitz - Quo Warranto in DC 1-25-10Juan del SurOrly Taitz - Quo Warranto Complaint, Exhibits 1-27-10Juan del SurMartin v Bennett, Lingle - Complaint for Declaratory JudgmentJuan del SurRhodes v MacDonald Order 4-09-CV-106 (CDL)Juan del SurGeorgia Eligibility Act - HB 401Juan del SurNebraska LB 654 - An Act Relating to ElectionsJuan del SurJB Williams - Obama Confirmed Ineligible for OfficeJuan del SurSharon Rondeau - Interview With Commander KerchnerJuan del SurBarnett v Obama Carter Dismisses SuitJuan del SurTakuan Seiyo - Goodbye to All ThatJuan del SurTaitz v Obama - Reply to Opposition, USDC DC Case 10-151Juan del SurFORMAL CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS NAMING BARACK
HUSSEIN OBAMAIN COMMISSION OF TREASON!Juan del SurThomas McInerney - Affidavit as Filed 8-20-10Juan del SurJB Williams - A Right to Lawful CommandJuan del SurOrly Taitz v Obama QW Judicial Notice 4-9-10Juan del SurHollister v Soetoro, Judge Memo 2008cv2254-21Juan del SurBarnett v Obama Ex Parte Appl Limited Stay 9-10-09Juan del SurMario Apuzzo - Quo WarrantoJuan del SurJB Williams - Monroe County TN Corruption Turns ViolentJuan del SurJohn Sutherland - Open Letter to All Fifty GovernorsJuan del SurStephen Tonchen - Obama Presidential Eligibility - An Introductory PrimerJuan del SurLeo Donofrio - Quo Warranto Legal BriefJuan del SurCook v Good 4-09-Cv-82 DismissalJuan del SurPerkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)Juan del SurBarnett v Obama - Conference Order 10-5-09Juan del Sur
RecommendedPatriots Heart v Soetoro - Petition for Grand JuryJuan del SurPETITION FOR THE CONVENING OF A FEDERAL GRAND JURY Patriot's Heart, Carl S...Sharon Rondeau - Interview With Mario Apuzzo June 9, 2010Juan del SurRegarding the Obama eligibility controversy, Attorney Apuzzo published his fi...Leo Donofrio - Dual Cititzen Disqualification IssueJuan del SurThe dual citizen POTUS disqualification issue stands alone and should be set ...JB Williams - The Bottom Line on Natural Born CitizenJuan del SurEven many conservative columnists and pundits seem confused on the issue of n...Douglas Vogt - Affidavit About White House False StatementsJuan del SurDouglas Vogt filed an affidavit to accompany a criminal complaint over the "C...Orly Taitz - Quo Warranto in DC 1-25-10Juan del SurSomething we have been waiting for - Orly Taitz has filed a Quo Warranto in W...Orly Taitz - Quo Warranto Complaint, Exhibits 1-27-10Juan del SurThis document is the Quo Warranto Case 1:10-cv-00151-RCL filed by Orly Taitz ...Martin v Bennett, Lingle - Complaint for Declaratory JudgmentJuan del SurThis complaint, filed by Andy Martin May 4, 2010 in the First Circuit Court i...Rhodes v MacDonald Order 4-09-CV-106 (CDL)Juan del SurA Georgia federal judge (Clay D. Land) today fined California lawyer Orly Tai...Georgia Eligibility Act - HB 401Juan del SurA BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 2 of Title 21 of t...Nebraska LB 654 - An Act Relating to ElectionsJuan del SurThis is a slightly modified version of the actual LB 654, removing the cross-...JB Williams - Obama Confirmed Ineligible for OfficeJuan del SurDual citizenship means dual or divided national loyalties. That’s why the qua...Sharon Rondeau - Interview With Commander KerchnerJuan del SurCommander Kerchner took a solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution ...Barnett v Obama Carter Dismisses SuitJuan del SurBarnett v Obama was dismissed by Judge Carter on Oct 29, 2009. This document ...Takuan Seiyo - Goodbye to All ThatJuan del SurI have highlighted as well the many ways in which the Western populace deserv...Taitz v Obama - Reply to Opposition, USDC DC Case 10-151Juan del SurOrly Taitz - Motion for leave of court to add Ronald Machen , JR, US Attorney...FORMAL CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS NAMING BARACK
HUSSEIN OBAMAIN COMMISSION OF TREASON!Juan del SurOBAMA is aiding and abetting America's enemies. OBAMA is lying to the America...Thomas McInerney - Affidavit as Filed 8-20-10Juan del SurWashington, D.C., August 31, 2010. Retired Air Force Lieutenant General Thoma...JB Williams - A Right to Lawful CommandJuan del SurMembers of the United States Military have sworn an oath to uphold and defend...Orly Taitz v Obama QW Judicial Notice 4-9-10Juan del SurTaitz v Obama. Motion for Judicial Notice Clearly, the plaintiff, as A Doct...Hollister v Soetoro, Judge Memo 2008cv2254-21Juan del SurThis is the case of retired Air Force Colonel Hollister, who is on lifetime P...Barnett v Obama Ex Parte Appl Limited Stay 9-10-09Juan del SurIn the case Barnett et al v Barack Obama et al, on September 10, 2009, the de...Mario Apuzzo - Quo WarrantoJuan del SurWe must understand that a quo warranto action is a direct attack on an office...JB Williams - Monroe County TN Corruption Turns ViolentJuan del SurWhat started out over a year ago as what seemed to be a simple citizen effort...John Sutherland - Open Letter to All Fifty GovernorsJuan del SurThis document is an open letter to all 50 American state governors, and is a ...Stephen Tonchen - Obama Presidential Eligibility - An Introductory PrimerJuan del SurThe Obama eligibility controversy stems from two facts: (1) the fact that Oba...Leo Donofrio - Quo Warranto Legal BriefJuan del SurA quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the Di...Cook v Good 4-09-Cv-82 DismissalJuan del SurTo make the record complete and easily accessible to the parties and other pe...Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)Juan del SurThe question is whether the plaintiff, Marie Elizabeth Elg. who was born in t...Barnett v Obama - Conference Order 10-5-09Juan del SurCASE NO. SA CV09-0082-DOC(ANx) This action has been assigned to the calend...Previous|NextPage 1 of 8