Saturday, November 08, 2008

US Supreme Court awaits response to Berg Writ of Certiorari from Obama, DNC and co-defendants

For Immediate Release: - 11/07/08


(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 11/07/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.

Mr. Berg remarked today, “I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama's response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States.”

Mr. Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. Mr. Berg filed a Writ of Certiorari for review of the case and an injunction to stay the election pending review. Justice Souter denied the injunction. It is expected that the Court will decide whether or not to review Berg v. Obama after the Defendants file their response, and Mr. Berg has replied to the Defendant’s response.

The Defendants' response is due by December 1st and Mr. Berg's reply will be submitted thereafter.

# # #

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659


Epaminondas said...

This is Berg's assertion.

There is as yet NO CORROBORATIVE evidence that his claim is true, and that the court has insisted on the birth cert.

If you can find that, I'd be happier.

I cannot

Aukmuntr said...

Regardless of Berg's assertions and the court's initial findings, I have one question: I have to show a true and attested BC to own a gun, why doesn't the presumptive POTUS not have to do the same?

Pastorius said...

That's a great question.

Kevin said...

Gun? Hell, you can't get a drivers license in Ohio without a Birth Certificate.

Always On Watch said...

Gun? Hell, you can't get a drivers license in Ohio without a Birth Certificate.

Same here in Virginia.

Why shouldn't BHO have to present all his Constitutional qualifications?

Anonymous said...

Memo to all illegal immigrants:

If you want a job then apply to be President of the United States. No proof of citizenship is required. False proof of your identity is accepted.

Kevin said...

Oh well. I feel that the voters of the US have been had.

BHO, Jr. is like a toy that kids see advertised on tv, it looks so slick and cool and can do everything, you just have to have it. Finaly you get that awesome toy and it turns-out to be a worthless piece of s**t.

Pastorius said...

YOu and I both have the 1928 Book of Common Prayer listed as being among our favorite books on our Blogger Profiles.


Kevin said...

Pastorius are you an Anglican?

I use the 1928 BCP daily if not in a printed form than I have the .pdf version on a thumb-drive or I go to

Pastorius said...

No, I'm not Anglican, though my parents are.

My parents live in the UK.

I'm an American fundamentalist evangelical.


But, I love the Book of Common Prayer, and I think American Evangelicals would do well to have such discipline, because most of them are floating in space.