Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball
nope. once congress confirmed him and he was sworn in he became the president. a lot of birthers believe that if he's proven a fraud all his decisions become null and void. they don't.
|
Shouldn't what is good for the courts, be good for the president?
Elsewise, there would be multi-branch collusion of fraud defeating the mechanics of the U.S. Constitution.
“No fraud is more odious than an attempt to subvert the administration of justice” Mr. Justice Roberts in
Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v, Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944).
A judge is an officer of the court, as well as are all attorneys. A state judge is a state judicial officer,
paid by the State to act impartially and lawfully. A federal judge is a federal judicial officer, paid by the
federal government to act impartially and lawfully. State and federal attorneys fall into the same general
category and must meet the same requirements. A judge is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477,
410 N.E.2d 626 (1980).
"Fraud upon the court" occurs whenever any officer of the court commits fraud before a tribunal. A judge
is not a court; he is under law an officer of the court, and he must not engage in any action to deceive the
court. Trans Aero Inc. v. LaFuerga Area Boliviana, 24 F.3d 457 (2nd Cir. 1994); Bulloch v. United States,
763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985) (fraud upon the court exists "where the judge has not performed his
judicial duties").
Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is
engaged in "fraud upon the court". In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985),
the court stated "Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and
is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. ... It is where
the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has
not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly
corrupted."
"Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species
of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the
court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging
cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal
Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated "a decision produced by fraud upon the
court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final."
What effect does an act of "fraud upon the court" have upon the court proceeding? "Fraud upon
the court" makes void the orders and judgments of that court. The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently
held that a void order is void at all times, does not have to be reversed or vacated by a judge, can not
be made valid by any judge, nor does it gain validity by the passage of time. The order is void ab initio.
Vallely v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920).
“Fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters,” Nudd v. Burrows (1875), 91 US 426, 23 Led 286,
290; particularly when “a judge himself is a party to the fraud,” Cone v. Harris (Okl. 1924), 230 P. 721, 723.
Windsor v. McVeigh (1876), 93 US 276, 23 Led 914, 918.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
