Free Speech
2010-07-09 14:24:09

It is noteworthy that it has been over a year and a half since I first began to write about the Citizens Grand Jury Process and Original Jurisdiction in the Supreme Court of cases against Barrack Hussein Obama and, to date, BHO’s lawyers have never been able to refute my Constitutional Theories.

The precedent for getting standing and bringing a case directly to the United States Supreme Court upon Original Jurisdiction is the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. (1 Crunch) 137, 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803). As succinctly stated by Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury, “If a persons duty is backed by law and not by political in nature, then he becomes subject of the law and is examinable by the court.”

Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution states, “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.”

Marbury was a case involving a minor public minister. The case against Barrack Hussein Obama involves all “Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls” of the United States and of all foreign nations with diplomatic status with the United States. Furthermore, the case against Barrack Hussein Obama involves all States of the United States as parties.

As in Marbury, We the People shall prosecute our cases against Barrack Hussein Obama petitioning the United States Supreme Court for a Writ of Mandamus compelling Barrack Hussein Obama to abide by the Constitutional Contract that he entered into with We the People on January 20, 2009 and uphold his Oath to abide by the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution of the United States of America.

It is stated in United States v. Butterworth, 18 S. Ct. 441, 169 U.S. 600 at 602 (1898),
“The office of a writ of mandamus is to compel the performance of a duty resting upon the person to whom the writ is sent. That duty may have originated in one way or in another. It may, as alleged in the present case, have arisen from the acceptance of an office which has imposed the duty upon its incumbent. But no matter out of what fact or relations the duty has grown, what the law requires, and what it seeks to enforce by a writ of mandamus, is the personal obligation of the individual to whom it addresses the writ.”

Following much good faith research regarding the issue of original jurisdiction in the Supreme Court of the United States, We the People have found no cases in the history of jurisprudence of the United States of America wherein a Defendant disputed the Constitutional fact that the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction over “all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls” as plainly stated in the Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 2.

That being the case, “We the People” respectfully request that the Barack Hussein Obama stipulate to the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction over all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; or, in the alternative, that Barack Hussein Obama show good cause why the Supreme Court of the United States shall not have original jurisdiction

http://grandjury.blogtownhall.com