Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Now
Rhodes
v.
MacDonald
949-683-5411
1 On July 8 2010 Application for stay of sanctions 10A524 was docketed with the
Supreme Court and addressed to Honorable Justice Clarence Thomas.
2. On July 16, Friday 2010, around 9PM EST Applicant Attorney Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq
(hereinafter Taitz) checked the electronic docket of the Supreme court, it showed no
answer from Clarence Thomas.
3. On the same day Taitz has issued a press release, stating that there is no answer from
Justice Thomas. Above press release was sent to some 28,000 media outlets and some
300,000 individuals.
4. On Saturday July 17, 2010 Taitz started getting comments on her website from some
Obama supporters gloating about the fact that Justice Thomas dismissed her application.
Originally, Taitz dismissed those as a dumb joke, but as those comments continued, she
checked the electronic docket of the Supreme Court and to her amazement found, that
somebody made a new entry on Saturday July 17, 2010, and backdated it for Thursday
the 15th of July, stating that Justice Thomas dismissed her application.
5. On Saturday the court was closed, Justices and clerks were not there, therefore the
applicant has reasonable belief and suspicion, that above entry was not authorized.
6. There appears to be a pattern of docket entries made or deletions of entries from the
docket done when the Supreme Court is closed.
7. On January 7, 2009 Your Honor reviewed another application for stay filed by Taitz on
behalf of her clients: 08A524 Lightfoot v Bowen. Your Honor distributed above
application to be heard in the conference of the full court on January 23, 2010.
8. This case was followed by a number of citizens with great interest, as it dealt with
Barack Hussein Obama’s illegitimacy to US presidency.
9. Some 360,000 US citizens have filed a petition by Net world Daily magazine, that was
addressed to Justices, asking them to hear the case on the merits.
10. Before inauguration, on January 19, 2010 Aplication 08A524 was on the docket of
the Supreme Court.
11. On January 21, 2009, when Supreme Court was reopened for business after
inauguration, and two days before the scheduled conference, application was not there, it
was deleted by someone, as if it never existed.
12. Numerous outraged citizens, including members of the media and state
representatives, called the Supreme Court and demanded to re-enter the application on
the docket.
13. On January 22, 2009 Taitz received a phone call from a stays clerk, Danny Bickel,
who asked Taitz to tell her supporters not to contact the Supreme Court, he stated that
application was never deleted. Taitz responded that she has affidavits and screen shots
from her supporters, showing that the case disappeared. At that time Mr. Bickel stated
that it was a computer problem, that affected all the cases. Taitz responded, that this
statement is not true either, as she has an affidavit from Attorney Theresa Ward, ESq,
member of the bar of the Supreme Court, who could see other cases on the docket, but
Taitz case was not there. Ms. Ward called the Supreme Court and complained. At that
point Mr. Bickel stated that the case will be re-entered within an hour and asked Taitz to
contact her supporters and ask them not to contact the Supreme Court, as the problem
was fixed. Above conversation happened on January 22, at the end of the day, while the
conference of all nine justices was supposed to be the next morning.
14. On January 23, 2009 all nine justices supposedly discussed the case.
15. On January 26, 2009 it was announced that the justices decided not to proceed with
oral argument.
16. On March 9, 2009 Justice Scalia was giving a lecture and signing his books in Los
Angeles.
17. Taitz attended the lecture, asked Justice Scalia questions during Q and A and later at
the book signing asked Justice Scalia, why the case was not heard in oral argument, why
wasn’t it heard on the merits. To her amazement, Justice Scalia had no clue the case even
existed, he could not remember one word, one thing about the case. When Taitz asked
Justice Scalia about other similar cases, he could not remember a thing either, even
though he was supposedly the Justice, who referred some of those cases to the conference
in the first place, which means that he supposedly read those cases more than once.
Argument
Currently, there is a clear pattern of entries being made on the docket of the Supreme
Court, or entries or even cases deleted, when the court is closed and the Justices and the
clerks are not there. While it is not uncommon for the clerks to make entries a day or two
after the order was made, it is uncommon to do it when the court is closed. It is more
unlikely for such entry to be made on an inauguration day, when all the Justices were not
there and could be seen on TV attending the inauguration. Supreme Court is not a city
bus, when one can go in and out any time he feels like. Supreme Court has tight security,
and there were situations where cases were held for nearly a month, when it was told to
the applicants, that the documents are undergoing Anthrax scan. It is highly imptobable,
that someone would be working in the Supreme Court, when it is closed, particularly on
inauguration day.
It is also of concern, that Justice Scalia could not remember any of the cases dealing with
legitimacy of Barack Obama, particularly in light of the fact that at the lecture he gave on
March 9, 2009 he stated that the Justices pick for oral argument cases not based on
beauty of writing or legal argument, but based on importance to the country. What can be
more important than legitimacy of a person sitting in the position of the president and
Commander in Chief?
Of Additional concern is the fact that in both cases unexplained activity happened, when
the cases were to the detriment of Mr. Obama, stating that he was not eligible to the
presidency due to the fact that he had foreign allegiance and citizenship and due to the
fact that he refused and still refuses to unseal his original birth certificate, and the short
version received does not show the name of the hospital or doctor or signatures. Taitz
also provided information, that the social security number used by Mr. Obama, 042-68-
4425, was issued in the state of CT, while he resided in Hi, and it was issued to an elderly
individual, born in 1890.
Points and authorities
Taitz cannot provide any points and authorities, as nothing like that ever happened in the
Supreme Court and Taitz is requesting your Honor to review the above Motion as the
matter of first impression.
Relief requested
Respectfully submitted
07.20.10.
Certification
I certify that true and correct copy of the above was served on
Washington DC 20530-0001
Assistant US Attorney
P.O.Box 1702
Macon, GA 31202-1702
US Commission
on Civil Rights
624 Ninth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20425 C
Department of Justice
Washington DC 20530-0001
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
BPI-ICB-CAPI
Head Office
Neuhuyskade 94
2596 XM The Hague
The Netherlands
Tel : 0031 (70) 3268070 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 0031 (70)
3268070 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Fax : 0031 (70) 3353531
Email: info@bpi-icb.org
Website: www.bpi-icb.org
BPI-ICB-CAPI
Secretaria Barcelona
laura_bpi@icab.es
tel: + 41 22 917 91 51
email: ototh@ohchr.org
Signed
www.OrlyTaitzEsq.com