UPDATE
Andy Martin sent two e-mails concerning the original blog that follows the dashed line:
1.Well, actually, "response due December 1" is only a citation of the SC Rules which call for a reply in 30 days. There is no time limit on action by the court.
2. The injunction was denied. The SC online docket is not the best, but a subsequent entry using the search under docket number confirms denial.
The original blog follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A poster to this blog has noted that the calendar of the Supreme Court is readily available here. The calendar clearly states this concerning Berg v. Obama here:
>Oct 30 2008 Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due December 1, 2008)
Oct 31 2008 Application (08A391) for an injunction pending disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.
I am not an attorney but I looked up the term certiorari on Wikipedia:
"A writ of certiorari currently means an order by a higher court directing a lower court to send the record in a given case for review."
So that means that the Supreme Court will decide on whether to review the Berg case on December 1. As well, an application for an injunction was filed pending disposition of the petitition for the writ of certiorari.
It does not seem to mean that there has been a court order requiring that Obama provide the vault copy birth certificate. Kick me if I'm wrong, but the Supreme Court calendar seems pretty clear. The decision on certiorari is required by December 1, the request for an injunction is pending a positive decision on the writ, which is also due December 1. That means that at this point nothing is due from Obama, and unless the Supreme Court grants the writ of certiorari, the case dies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hey, you finally got something right!
Mr. Langbert,
A few clarifications
So that means that the Supreme Court will decide on whether to review the Berg case on December 1.
A more accurate statement is that the Supreme Court will decide whether to review the Berg case sometime after December 1. Indeed, it would be highly unusual for all justices to read the briefs and "vote" on certiorari on the same day that the respondents briefs are due. (Upon submission of writ petition and responding briefs, the justices vote on whether to accept the writ. If four justices vote to accept the writ, it will be granted.)
Re: It does not seem to mean that there has been a court order requiring that Obama provide the vault copy birth certificate.
This statement is correct. SCOTUS orders are published regularly on the SCOTUS website (see here. There has been no published order requiring Obama to produce his birth certificate. Indeed, such a requirement would violate basic appellate review rules, which generally prohibit appellate courts (including SCOTUS) from considering evidence that was not before the district court.
Re: "...[T]he request for an injunction is pending a positive decision on the writ.
This is not correct. The SCOTUS, per Justice Souter's Nov. 3 ruling, has denied the request for an injunction.
Post a Comment