17 May, 2012 (updated 5 minutes ago).
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Pasadena, California; Oral Arguments; Keyes-Barnett-Drake et. al., v. Obama Keyes/Drake et. al., vs. Obama. Plaintiffs include 10 state representatives and 30 members of the US military. - 5/2/2011 - obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com - www.ObamaReleaseYourRecords.com - http
Visit hybridbikereviewsz.com to read our unbiased review of the Schwinn Discover Hybrid Bike for women. Also learn where to purchase this bike at a great discount!
Schwinn Discovery Schwinn Discover Review
Courtesy CSPAN, FedFlix, courts.gov 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 2/12/2007, C-SPAN Program ID: 196779-1 From C-SPAN's Description: The Ninth Circuit of the US Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Orkin et al. v. Taylor. A lower court dismissed the Orkin family's claim to a painting in the possession of actress Elizabeth Taylor on the grounds that the California three-year statute of limitations had run out. Elizabeth Taylor bought the painting in 1963 at Sotheby's auction house in London, believing the artwork belonged to another German Jew, Alfred Wolf. Four descendants of the late Margarete Mauthner sued seeking to claim the Van Gogh painting, View of the Asylum and Chapel at St. Remy, lost when she fled Nazi Germany in 1939. The plaintiffs claim that Taylor should return the painting under the Holocaust Victims Redress Act, the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act, and other judicially formulated policies that encourage prospective buyers of artworks on the international market to take precautions against acquiring Nazi-confiscated and other stolen materials. Mr. Hamilton is attorney for the Orkin family. Mr. Reiss is attorney for Elizabeth Taylor.
The Rachel Maddow Show, MSNBC, 2-7-2012 Ted Olson
gay lesbian marriage proposition
Courtesy C-SPAN, courts.gov 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 6/22/2006, C-SPAN Program ID: 193153-1 From C-SPAN's Description: The full panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Padilla v. Lever over allegations that Orange County, California, election officials violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by not providing petitions in both English and Spanish for the recall of a Santa Ana Unified District school board member. In November 2005, a Ninth Circuit three-judge panel ruled that Orange County election officials violated the bilingual requirements of the Voting Rights Act.
Courtesy C-SPAN, courts.gov 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 4/06/2005, C-SPAN Product ID: 186185-1 From C-SPAN's Description: The US Court of Appeals for the 9th District heard oral argument in the case of Santiago v. Rumsfeld. Sergeant Emiliano Santiago, a member of the Oregon Army National Guard, had two weeks left of an 8-year agreement to serve in the National Guard when was he ordered to Afghanistan for a year or more. Sergeant Santiago sought an injunction to stop his deployment to Afghanistan while he challenged the "stop loss" order that requires him to remain in the military beyond the term of his enlistment contract. After hearing oral argument, the Ninth Circuit's three-judge panel affirmed the lower court's decision in favor of the government's argument and denied an injunction to stop Sergeant Santiago's deployment to Afghanistan. The case was heard in the moot courtroom of the University of Washington School of Law.
William Wagener, introduces the 3 judge Federal Hearing that Major Media did a black out on, thank to OBAMA announcement of Bin Laden being Killed May 1st, 2011, which would mean, either Bush operatives did NOT kill Bin Laden in 2007 or Obama is lying to hide THIS Hearing, by a DISTRACTIVE LIE that can NOT be disproved because, they allegedly dumped Osama Bin Ladens body in the Ocean, after going to the trouble to "take possession" of his just killed corpse. STRANGE is insufficient, but this hearing was probably the target of the big Obama Lie about Osama.
Segment #5 LA County Sheriff was respondent in the case involving Richard I. Fine whose Writ of Habeas Corpus was filed in the 9th Circuit. Three Justices assigned to the case all had ties to the Los Angeles power center who were invovled in corrupt practices, as described in court filings by former US Prosecutor Richard I. Fine, Ph.D. He remained in solitary "coercive confinement" for 18 months as California Judges inexplicably denied, without hearing, his petitition to be released from jail. The Cast of characters described by Fine in his court documents paint a trail of power from a big law firm under contract with the County who was negotiation leases in Marina del Rey, whose partner was also President of the State Bar \while Fine's Disbarment procedings were underway and while he was fighing the Marina lessee on behalf of homeowners. According to the California Judicial Council, 90% of the State Judges are receiving illegal payments from counties, but were given retroactive criminal immunity in Senate Bill SBX2 11) for taking the illegal payments and failing to report and to disclose to litigants in the court room of their conflict.
Courtesy C-SPAN, Public.Resource.Org The Honorable Harry Pregerson The Honorable Michael Daly Hawkins The Honorable Margaret McKeown Judicial Proceeding Domestice Surveillance Program US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit San Francisco, California (United States) ID: 200464 - 08/15/2007 (Recorded and Copied from C-SPAN and Uploaded to the Internet Archive) US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco heard oral arguments in two cases on the government's warrantless wiretapping program. The Court will decide whether or not to dismiss the two cases under the "state secrets" privilege, which bars the presentation of evidence in court that could threaten national security. Lower court judges in both cases rejected the government's attempts to get the cases dismissed. The plaintiffs in Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. v. Bush are an Oregon branch of a Saudi charity that has been investigated for alleged terrorist ties. They argue that they have a top-secret document proving they were a direct target of National Security Agency surveillance. Hepting v. AT&T is a class action on behalf of a group of AT&T customers who allege that the company intercepted their phone calls and electronic mail, then disclosed the information to the NSA.
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation Inc.
Two Attorneys , Gary Kreep, who represents 2 clients, Wiley Drake & Mr. Robinson and Dr./Orly TAITZ, who represents Ambassador Alan Keyes & 39 others present simular arguements that Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetero , is NOT Qualified to BE President, because he is in FACT, NOT a US Citizen and did not legally hold US Senate Seat, nor the Presidency, because of his own FRAUD. FRAUD on the US of A. and FRAUD on the election form, FRAUD in dodging the Courts and summons to court for 3 years. KREEP got in on TAITZ's federal Law suit on Sept. 8, 2009. He probably does NOT have standing because the election was over for 10 months. Orly TAITZ , however had put on the Supreme Court schedule a hearing on OBAMA's Qualificationn for Jan. 20, 2009, the day of inAugeration, and SHE probably DOES have "standing". Question is will these elderly federal jurist have the personal integrity to remand Orly TAITZ's case back to Judge David O. CARTER or another judge for trial by Jury, so Atty. TAITZ can get the evidence of : 1. no valid selective service #, which every young American man would have had IF he was a citizen, 2. no valid Social Security number, and 3. NO VALID original long form Birth Certificate. This whole hearing took less than 1 hour. The fate of not only Mr. Obama, but the Constitution and lifes now for a short time rest with these three Jurist, and what does any of us know about them, other than they were all appointed by Democrat Presidents.
Drake v. Obama Orly Taitz gary kreep atty.
Press Conference after the ruling from the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Prop 8.
Marriage Standing Press Conference
Senator Cardin praises 9th Circuit Court of Appeals nominee Goodwin Liu's intellect, fidelity to the law and commitment to equal justice.
goodwin liu judge judiciary cardin
Many are commenting on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to rule California's Prop 8.
DSC_0121.AVI
Bay area lgbt same sex marriage gay marriage
Courtesy C-SPAN, courts.gov Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 10/10/2005, C-SPAN Program ID: 189456-1 From C-SPAN's Description: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed a lower court decision that struck down a federal law banning partial-birth abortions. The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, signed into law by President Bush, prohibits abortions as early as 12 weeks with no exception for the health of the mother. A San Francisco District Court ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood calling the ban unconstitutional. Mr. Katsas talked about a medical disagreement about the safety of the procedure and the courts should defer to a finding by Congress that the procedure is never medically necessary. Ms. Gartner said that doctors should have the right to exercise their clinical judgment.
