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.
Obama was served via his attorney in Georgia. The subpoena is valid.
It appears that the organizers of the Birther Summit does not agree:
OF SUBPOENAS, TRIALS, AND A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT (http://www.birthersummit.org/news/74-of-subpoenas-trials-and-a-vexatious-litigant.html - broken link)
Quote:
The Subpoenas
Next, is the matter of the subpoenas. A Georgia court has jurisdiction to subpoena residents of the State of Georgia. Period. If someone who resides in a state other than Georgia is to be issued a subpoena, the attorney requesting the subpoena would first have to request the Georgia court for a commission and/or a letter rogatory, which would go to a court in the state in which that person resides, and that court would have to issue a subpoena. Orly skipped that step and merely mailed out multiple subpoenas as if they were enforceable (which, they most certainly, are not).
Then how, you may ask, did Orly get subpoenas signed by a judge to send out in the first place? I'm glad you asked. As a matter of convenience for attorneys admitted to practice in the State of Georgia, the OSAH had made available a blank pre-signed subpoena form to be downloaded, filled out, and served. That practice is not unusual, as it is assumed that proper officers of the court would not abuse the forms, and it alleviates the need for attorneys to clog the court with signing requests. Of course, attorneys using the form normally understand that it is their responsibility to adhere to the rules and regulations pertaining to such subpoenas, chief of which is proper service.
Comparing the first link with the second, are you led to believe that the judge "signed" or "ordered" Orly's subpoenas, or do you understand that the blank form was something Orly merely downloaded? Orly released a list of 22 witnesses that she has supposedly "served," even though she never actually went to the trouble of doing what one must do to obtain proper service, so, any of those 22 who don't actually reside in the State of Georgia have not actually been served, and have no legal reason to respond or appear. Any of them may choose to ask the judge to quash a subpoena, but that would be out of respect for the court and the legal process, and not because there is any validity to the subpoena itself. In fact, any such motion to quash would likely include the fact that the subpoena is legally invalid as a reason for it to be quashed.
Interestingly, one of the "witnesses" Orly lists is "Custodian of records Assissi [sic] school Jakarta, Indonesia;" so, not only does Orly believe that Georgia somehow has jurisdiction over Hawaii and other states (which, it doesn't), she seems to believe that it has jurisdiction over Jakarta, Indonesia as well. Are you beginning to see the problem here?
Not only has no judge in this country (or any other) ordered Barack Obama to "stand trial," Orly has not been granted the discovery she has claimed to have been granted. In fact, administrative hearings don't even allow for discovery:
616-1-2-.38 Discovery. Amended.
Discovery shall not be available in any proceeding before an Administrative Law Judge except to the extent specifically authorized by law. Nothing in this Rule is intended to limit the provisions of Article 4 of Chapter 18 of Title 50 or Rule 37.
And, for the record, what is excluded from the discovery rule are public records (or, records that are not protected by statute, which H.R.S. 338-18 would certainly apply in this case, making whatever "discovery" Orly thinks she's been granted a moot point).
Moreover, the Georgia Administrative Court has no jurisdiction over a federal agency or any part of the federal government, so there go most of Orly's subpoenas—including the one to Sheriff Joe, who, unfortunately for Orly, lives in Arizona, and not Georgia. He could certainly travel to Georgia by choice, but he is not compelled to do so by law.
And remember folks.... this is a Birther talking here!
What do we have here...this SC ruling established a sitting president has no immunity from civil litigation for acts done before taking office.
Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
