You didn't answer my question. Should I repeat it for you or do I take your non-answer as your admission that you do agree with the attorney not licensed to practice law in the state of Georgia, the attorney who filed the action which is the subject of the OP, that a Georgia state court has the lawful "final" authority to decide a US constitutional issue?
Relative to the comments you rely on, it would appear that they have never heard of "judicial notice" and that they are themselves unfamiliar with Georgia law. As cited by the attorney for the defendant in the motion to quash: "Subpoenas issued by Georgia courts do not have extraterritorial power." Hughes v. State, 228 Ga. 593, 187 S.E.2d 135 (1972)
You do realize that Georgia does not have the authority to second guess or alter the actions of the State of Hawaii or the state of Hawaii's state agencies or elected officials, don't you? You do know that Georgia state courts cannot trump or alter or circumvent the decisions of the federal judiciary relative to issues involving the US Constitution, don't you?
I never said Georgia violated its own laws, I said it would appear that the administrative judge of the state of Georgia violated the laws of Georgia if he issued subpoenas as your title to this thread and your OP imply.
Relative to the attorneys you quote and their opinions about Obama's attorney's filings, I think Rasselas' responded quite nicely to their silliness:
Here is a website you might want to visit on a regular basis. It covers all the birther conspiracy nonsense. Obama Conspiracy Theories | The Debunker’s Guide to Obama Conspiracy Theories
I like its quote of the day:
Here is another write up you might want to read. It fully debunks the birther arguments you and others cling to and it does what Orly Tatz and the others filing these birther cases tend to avoid and that is cite the case and statutory laws which support its position.Quote of the Day
To cite Minor v. Happersett as the definitive statement of the meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen” is to exhibit an unfortunate lack of understanding of the Supreme Court’s 1874 decision in that case.
-- Associate Professor Joesph Hylton
-- Marquette University Law School
What to expect from the Obama birth certificate hearing - Atlanta Conservative | Examiner.com



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks






Reply With Quote
Bookmarks