Civil libertarians have been complaining that many liberals are ignoring that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has been viewed as hostile to core liberal values and has a fairly conservative voting record in many areas, including free speech, student rights, and criminal procedure. For a review of her cases, click here. Another case has come to light that shows little of the empathy cited by the White House. While Vice President Joe Biden has emphasized the Sotomayor “watches the back of police” in cases (which is supported in some of her more controversial rulings), she has shown little empathy for those challenging police or convictions. The case of Jeffrey Deskovic is being cited as one such case.
Sotomayor was one of the judges who dismissed Deskovic’s 2000 appeal to United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit with a cursory two-page decision. The panel based its decision on the fact that the filing was made four days late due to confusion between the lawyer and the clerk.
Deskovic was convicted at 16 of killing a high school classmate and filed a habeas corpus petition to challenge his conviction. He was later proven innocent by DNA evidence.
His lawyer insisted that he was misinformed about the due date by the clerk’s office and that his client should not suffer for the miscommunication. However, Sotomayor and another judge refused to consider the merits based on the technical filing problem.
He would spend six more years behind bars until finally proven innocent (and the real killer arrested).
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 requires that habeas corpus petitions must be submitted no more than a year after a conviction becomes final or, as the courts later determined, no more than a year from the act’s implementation. This meant that he had until April 24, 1997 to file his habeas but his papers were filed four days late. Sotomayor and Judge Rosemary S. Pooler ruled that, even if the lawyer was told by the clerk that he had the later due date, it was still a violation and barred the appeal.
There is an interesting disconnect in the position of many liberal organizations, which have abandoned prior views to support this nominee without a hint of concern. As noted earlier, such rulings would normally cause liberals considerable concern and prompt intense review if this were a Republican nominee. Instead, there is virtually no discussion of such rulings by most liberals despite objections from civil libertarians that the left will lose ground on the Court if Sotomayor votes as she did on the Second Circuit.
For the full story, click here.
Hawaiian Home Lands is part of the Hawaiian Government and the Hawaiian Government will not accept Obama’s Certification of Live Birth (COLB).
Obama can’t even get a drivers license in Hawaii with that fake COLB. To get a drivers licence in Hawaii a person has to have a certified birth certificate. They won’t accept a COLB.
Prove it to yourself. Print a copy of Obama’s fraudulent COLB and take it and show it to the people at the drivers license office in your city. They won’t take that piece of trash. It is not a birth certificate.
Are you still Obama’s and Treacy’s idiot?
Mike A writes:
If you read a selection of BVM’s posts, you will recognize that he never offers any proof for any of his assertions. He will simply keep repeating them because he has developed on obsession with Obama, or with the fact that Obama was elected, a fact which he is unable to accept psychologically. Sadly, we have seen plenty of examples of where that can lead.
me: nothing like a good obsession to liven up the day and in this way BVM is being true to the core principles of being obsessed. latch on to one thing and never let go. facts will never get in the way and neither will discussion that seeks to broaden the topic. proof is unnecessary. the rant is distilled into paranoid thinking and anyone who seeks to alter this is guilty of being a participant in the cover-up.
these birthers are not going anywhere and they will never change.
the only interesting thing that makes BVM different is that s/he is calling on Prof Turley to provide evidence that s/he is right and that there is a vast conspiracy to defraud the American public.
If you read a selection of BVM’s posts, you will recognize that he never offers any proof for any of his assertions. He will simply keep repeating them because he has developed on obsession with Obama, or with the fact that Obama was elected, a fact which he is unable to accept psychologically. Sadly, we have seen plenty of examples of where that can lead.
By the way, a lot of people say that Obama should release whatever documents the birthers want so that the controversy will go away.
But they are not going away, ever, according to a statement linked to bvm’s site:
QUOTE ON:
21. If President Obama’s birth certificate shows conclusively that he was born in Hawaii, would it end the eligibility controversy?
Definitely not! President Obama has stated publicly that his father was not a U.S. citizen. According to the birthers’ understanding of history and law, if his father was not a U.S. citizen, President Obama cannot be a Constitutional natural born citizen, regardless of where he might have been born. UNQUOTE
Source:
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm#ref20
So there you are. They are never going to let it go.
BVM’s last post said “As I go back through some of the posts of past I see Vince Treacy has been putting out quite a bit of misinformation about Obama. I wouldn’t believe much of anything Vince Treacy has to say about Obama.”
Perhaps any specific items of “misinformation” could be pointed out and identified so that I could check them out and respond to the accusation. Even Boyle over at Bio caught me out on a misquote of the 19th Amendment, and I was glad to thank him for the correction. Other than that, I will have to let my posts stand as written.
I took some time to review all of bvm’s claims about Obama’s birth certificate on this thread:
‘The document Obama presents as his ‘birth certificate’ is not acceptable as proof in Hawaii where he claims to have been born. “Hawaii Home Lands won’t take it, but Obama insists it certifies him to be Commander-in-Chief.” The evidence mounts that Obama is not even an American citizen.”
“The document Obama presents as his ‘birth certificate’ is not acceptable as proof even in Hawaii where he claims to have been born. The evidence mounts that Obama is not an American citizen. “
“His fraudulent Hawaiian COLB is not accepted as proof even in Hawaii where Obama claims to have been born.”
“JT: Does the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accept Obama’s COLB as proof of birth?”
“The Hawaiian Government Dept. of Hawaiian Home Lands requires a certified copy of Certificate of Birth. They will not accept Obama’s Certification of Live Birth (COLB).”
The common theme seems to be that an official, valid legal Hawaiian COLB is not acceptable by one specific department of the State’s government, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) This point, however, is irrelevant to the question of Obama’s eligibility for the Presidency of the United States. A COLB form is not sufficient evidence for the DHHL because an applicant must also prove at least 50% native Hawaiian ancestry to qualify for a homestead in the land held in trust by the Department.
Anyone here can search wiki for extensive information on the Hawaiian Homelands, established first in 1921 by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, and still in effect as amended. It set aside land in Hawaii in trust for homesteading by native Hawaiians, that is the kanakas or indigenous Polynesian people of Hawaii or their descendants. Wiki notes that the Act included a controversial definition of “Native Hawaiians” as persons with 50 % or more Hawaiian blood.
QUOTE ON: Hawaiian Homes Commission Act
The legal basis for the establishment of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) is the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended (HHCA). Passed by Congress and signed into law by President Warren Harding on July 9, 1921 (chapter 42, 42 Stat. 108), the HHCA provides for the rehabilitation of the native Hawaiian people through a government-sponsored homesteading program. Native Hawaiians are defined as individuals having at least 50 percent Hawaiian blood.
Pursuant to provisions of the HHCA, the Department provides direct benefits to native Hawaiians in the form of 99-year homestead leases at an annual rental of $1. In 1990, the Legislature authorized the Department to extend leases for an aggregate term not to exceed 199 years (Act 305, Session Laws of Hawaii 1990; section 208, HHCA). Homestead leases are for residential, agricultural, or pastoral purposes. Aquacultural leases are also authorized, but none have been awarded to date. The intent of the homesteading program is to provide for economic self-sufficiency of native Hawaiians through the provision of land.
Other benefits provided by the HHCA include financial assistance through direct loans or loan guarantees for home construction, replacement, or repair, and for the development of farms and ranches; technical assistance to farmers and ranchers; and the operation of water systems.
UNQUOTE Source: http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/laws, official site of DHHL.
The Department advises applicants how prove their genealogy in order to qualify: “At the end of this document there is a list of state agencies where you can go for help with your research. Other sources include the state libraries; the LDS Family History Centers, operated by the Mormon Church; hospitals; schools; religious organizations; and reputable genealogists.”
Obama is clearly not a native Hawaiian, has never claimed to be one, would never qualify for a homestead, and would never have to apply for one. But those facts are not relevant to his qualifications to be President.
So all that bvm can establish is that neither Obama nor anyone else born in Hawaii can qualify for home lands homesteads merely by presenting an Certification of Live Birth, even if that COLB is completely and totally valid and legal in all respects. Persons born in Hawaii cannot qualify unless they can also establish that they can further establish proof of at least 50% Hawaiian ancestry. At the same time, all persons born in Hawaii, one of the 50 United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and as citizens by birth are eligible to serve as President.
I hope this clears up bvm’s confusion about the requirements of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and the reasons why the COLB alone is not sufficient for their purposes.
JT:
Even though you are not posting some of my comments I don’t mean to be ungrateful for your freedom of site and torture of war crimes stand but I wish you would make this proof of birth opinion for these people. It would be so easy for you to show Obama as he really is.
I do admire that you are bucking the system as much as you do and letting me do same. Thanks.
Which best characterizes this blawg:
#1) VOTED THE #1 LEGAL THEORY AND LAW PROFESSOR BLOG OF THE TOP 100 LEGAL BLOGS BY THE ABA JOURNAL
Or
#2) “I’ve watched this blawg turn to crap, more and more” quoted from the post above by longtime “Turlee” Patty C
We must all think about what we want from and *for* this blawg and the respect to which we demonstrate towards Professor Turley by our postings herein.
Will the upcoming 2009, 3rd Annual ABA Journal Blawg 100 still find this blawg as the Best Blog in Legal Theory, as referenced in # 1 above; or in #2 (pun intended)?
As I go back through some of the posts of past I see Vince Treacy has been putting out quite a bit of misinformation about Obama. I wouldn’t believe much of anything Vince Treacy has to say about Obama. Many of you are lost in lies.
JT: Is Obama’s COLB proof of birth?
The Hawaiian Government Dept. of Hawaiian Home Lands requires a certified copy of Certificate of Birth. They will not accept Obama’s Certification of Live Birth (COLB.
JT is moderating my evidence. JT: why are you allowing these people to labor under all the Obama lies of misinformation?
So far you have avoided posting evidence by claimin you are unable to post it, although you posts come through just fine. You then repeat your dodge. I therefore conclude you have no evidence to support your claim.
“Hawaii does not accept Obama’s fraudulent ‘birth certificate’…”(BVM)
——————————————————————-
BVM,
Please show detailed evidence of this claim as Vince requested. Please do not change the subject but present your evidence. If you are certain that Hawaii does not accept Obama’s birth certificate then it should not be a problem for you to back up this claim with actual evidence. If you are unwilling to show evidence for this claim then I and others will assume you are not serious in making it.
JT: Is Obama’s COLB proof of birth? Can you help them come out of the Obama stupor of lies?
We have little tolerance for misinformation at the Turley site. The fact is that Obama’s COLB is not proof of birth in Hawaii or anywhere. It is another Obama lie.
The following is misinformation.
———————–
Vince Treacy
Fact: Hawaii does accept Obama’s certificate as proof. It was issued by the State of Hawaii, attested to by two Hawaii State Officials, in accordance with Hawaii statae laws, and is valid everywhere.
I am not being allowed to post evidence.
JT:
Does the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accept Obama’s COLB as proof of birth?
A ‘Certification of Live Birth’ (COLB), as presented by Obama, is not proof of birth in a real Hawaiian court or any real court.
See the difference in a COLB and Hawaiian birth certificate;
http://buenavistamall.com/COLB.jpg
http://buenavistamall.com/HIbirthcertificate.jpg
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – The Hawaiian certification of live birth Barack Obama posted on his campaign website and distributed to select news organizations as proof he was a “natural born citizen” would not be accepted as a “birth certificate” even for some Hawaiian state government eligibility issues, WND has learned.
The investigation follows a Honolulu Star Bulletin column Saturday, which quotes a state Department of Health spokeswoman as saying the state’s current certification of live birth is recognized “as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements.”
The website of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, however, states clearly the certification of live birth touted by the Obama campaign, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and a host of other Obama defenders is not acceptable as a form of identification to qualify under this program.
As WND has reported, certifications of live birth were widely issued to Hawaiians born in foreign countries in 1961, the year Obama was born.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=100451
Here is an update about the case against Yoo from Glenn Greenwald.
“I hope to write more about this with time permitting, but this decision (.pdf) by Bush 43-appointed federal Judge Jeffrey White from Friday — refusing to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Jose Padilla against John Yoo, which alleges that Yoo violated numerous constitutional rights of Padilla’s by virtue of his torture and other memos — is both extremely significant and very well-reasoned. Ironically, the Obama DOJ, in representing Yoo, raised many of Yoo’s defining legal theories in order to argue for dismissal of the lawsuit (see p. 22: the Executive is vested with war-related power and the judiciary has no role to play in such matters; judges should defer to the President; what was done to Padilla is too secret to allow judicial review, etc.). It was those Yooian theories that were resoundingly rejected by Judge White, who held that the brutal, inhumane treatment to which Padilla alleges he was subjected plainly constitutes serious violations of his Constitutional rights and that Yoo’s memos can be shown to be responsible for those violations.
Judge White’s systematic rejection of the arguments once made by the Bush DOJ — and now made by the Obama DOJ — to prevent courts from adjudicating the legality of presidential actions was prefaced with this citation to the Federalist Papers:
(6) As a reminder: as I wrote about on Thursday, the ACLU now has a superb new website and new project to bring about accountability for torture. There will be many new updates and developments from there shortly.”
“Hawaii does not accept Obama’s fraudulent ‘birth certificate’…”(BVM)
——————————————————————-
BVM,
Please show detailed evidence of this claim as Vince requested. Please do not change the subject but present your evidence. If you are certain that Hawaii does not accept Obama’s birth certificate then it should not be a problem for you to back up this claim with actual evidence. If you are unwilling to show evidence for this claim then I and others will assume you are not serious in making it.
Sorry, BVM, that is a blatant evasion.
You can use the search function to find JT’s postings on the Obama and McCain natural born citizen issue.
Where is the evidence?
JT: What is your opinion of the Obama birth certificate issue?
“The qualifications for the Hawaiian Home Lands program require a certified copy of a standard birth certificate – also known as the “long-form certificate” filled out in the hospital and including details such as the name of the hospital and the attending physician.”
‘NOT’ a Certification of Live Birth (COLB) as presented by Obama.
Examples of both;
1. http://buenavistamall.com/COLB.jpg
2. http://buenavistamall.com/HIbirthcertificate.jpg
See the differences in the COLB and a real Hawaiian birth certificate?
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=100451
You will have to show us some evidence.