http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/20/4203280/ga-judge-orders-president-to-appear.html This could be good! Had to change links
My initial reaction when I read the thread title was can he do that? Its interesting to say the least. It will be interesting to see what all takes place if Obama actually goes, but I doubt he does.
The left doesn't have a monopoly on activist judges like many think. It's sad that our judicial system is as corrupted by partisanship as our political system. We're screwed.
After reading more into this, there is really nothing to this. This is the same action that has been tried repeatedly for the last 3 years, and Obama will ultimately not have to show up and will easily refute the accusation with a copy of the documents he has already shown multiple times.
That is why this is nothing more than a judge with an agenda to promote for his masters. It's sickening that the judiciary can be bought as well regardless which side is buying. So much for the blind scales of justice.
Actually, it was Obama's defender that made this get any attention by screwing up. The claimant demanded Obama himself be subpoena'd, and in his protests to this movement Obama's defender failed to actually file the request for that to not happen. The judge is giving him an opportunity to resubmit. So it isn't actually the judge being a douche bag, but rather just the claimant.
My bad. But there are other judges that have done this, so I still stand by the spirit of my comments.
So... the Pres failed to show. Bogus or not, he ignored the law. Not sure if that makes me like him, or not. Worse case, though, he doesn't go on the ballot in Georgia. Not sure if that is a big deal or not, since he didn't win Georgia in 2008, anyway. And by didn't win, I mean... he could have just not shown up.
I'm sure there is executive privilege that allows the president to not appear in State Court every time some lunatic brings some bullshit lawsuit.
Yea, it is an appeal to the State's Secretary of State... who, in this case, said he had to show up. The system itself is supposed to protect from bullshit lawsuits, and in this case, the system said it wasn't a bullshit lawsuit.
Georgia's Secretary of State can't order the President of the United States to do shit, float. He'll simply claim Presidential immunity, executive privilege, etc. and tell him to stick it up his ass.
Wait a second, you're asking for precedent that a State Secretary of State can't order the President of the United States to do something? Are you actually being serious?
Negative. I'm asking for precedent that the President of the United States can ignore judicial order (not ruling... order), and thus the judicial branch itself, via executive privilege. And why, if that is the case, was that not presented to the judge, as reason, rather than an attempt to circumvent the order by way of the SoS. But you knew that, didn't you?
One, the President of the United States, in his citizen capacity, has civil immunity during the time he's the President of the United States. This is a question about his birth certificate, thus, it concerns his status as a citizen. Thus, he has civil immunity from any civil suit or subpoena. But, you knew that, didn't you?
Nope, but I enjoy learning something new. This, however, is not against his status as a citizen. It is against his status on the ballot of the State of Georgia, which, per Georgia law, is capable of being reviewed. He may very well be immune against lawsuit pursuant to his actions as President, but he is not immune to having his ballot listing challenged. But you know that, didn't you?
He is immune from any civil suit whether it be from his actions as president or not. It doesn't matter if the actions were before his term as presidency. He's immune while he's president. Yes, I knew they could challenge him being on the ballot, but that wasn't your argument. Your argument was that he was "breaking the law" by not appearing, which is patently false.