March 16, 2009
(cyberattack deleted – recovered from cache)
[See links below for video]
Here’s the audio of Orly Taitz asking Chief Justice Roberts about her case. He respectfully cuts her off after the audience grumbles. They reacted but it’s hard to tell if it consisted of – laughing, gasping or amen!
MageesterMixIt
Take special note of what the moderator says about what cannot be discussed.
Questions not speeches.
Connection to the university community.
Due to the duties of his office, the Chief Justice would not be able to answer any questions seeking legal opinions or posing issues that are pending, or likely to become pending, before the US Supreme Court.
ORLY TAITZ:
Hi, Justice Roberts. I am an attorney. My name is Orly Taitz. And I actually flew from Southern California thousands of miles – I got up at three o’clock in the morning to be here to ask you a question – so please give me a little bit of leeway. And, uh, this question is:
I wanted to know if you are aware of some illegal activity that is going on in the Supreme Court of the United States?
I brought a case to you personally, and you personally had decided to distribute it to conference on January 23.
Your clerk, Danny Bickell, on his own, decided to hide the supplemental brief from you and not docket it. Later on, the case was erased from the docket. Hundreds of citizens were calling and demanding to put it back.
I talked to Justice-Justice Scalia on Monday, and he stated he never heard of the case, even though supposedly it was discussed in conference on January 23rd.
I have hear pages, of citizens-half a million citizens have signed petition to you personally, and each and every justice, demanding that you hear my case: Lightfoot v Bowen that stated that Barack [I would have liked to have seen his face right at this moment] Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro is totally illegitimate for presidency due to the fact [audience reacts] that he is ah, ah foreign national at birth, ah-ah–
CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS:
Thank you-thank you very much Ma’am, and I appreciate you traveling so far. If-if you have particular documents that you want, uh, to-to leave with us, I’ll be happy to look at them if you leave them behind.
Beyond that, I obviously can’t talk about any cases, or applications or petitions that are pending.
Thank you. Thank you.
MODERATOR:
A member of security will be happy to see you with regard to the documents.
She got cut off – politely – but was the microphone taken away? You can’t hear her saying thank you or anything else. There was some murmuring around the folks who taped this that would be interesting to decipher.
Best line was about Scalia and how he had never heard of the case, even though supposedly it was discussed in conference on January 23rd. So did they talk about it or not? How much control does little Danny have? And what relative got him the job?
Anyone have a little free time and some sleuthing skills – check out Danny boy’s connections: to the justices, politicians, families and of course barry. Though now that I think about it – I think he was the same guy who messed with Leo Donofrio. I don’t know if he had anything to do with the anthrax. I’ll have to look in the archives/drafts. And if it is the same guy, kinda says it all.
Did they know about the cases before them when they met with barry and Biden?
What I really want to know is who Roberts called first: barry, Scalia, Homeland Security, President of the University, local police, Danny Bickell or the Secret Service for allowing her anywhere near him – her blonde hair is pretty recognizable and then there’s the accent and flight manifest.
***
(3-13) Orly Taitz delivers documents to Chief Justice Roberts
(3-13) AP reporter’s take on Taitz – Justice Roberts interaction
(3-16) Orly Taitz shout out to Mr Richard Holley in Moscow Idaho for his assistance
(3-16) Orly Taitz questions Chief Justice Roberts (audio/text)
(3-21) Orly Taitz questions Chief Justice Roberts (video)
(3-17) Orly Taitz outs Danny Bickell to Justice Roberts
(3-18) Explanation: Danny Bickell
(3-18) Leo Donofrio vs Danny boy Bickell (Nov 13th)
(3-24) Leo Donofrio vs Danny boy Bickell (Nov 12th)
Tags: "birthers", attorney general eric holder, barry, barry soetoro, birth certificate, certification of live birth, chief justice roberts, citizens against proobama media bias, COLB, danny bickell, DEBRA BOWEN, eric holder, GAIL LIGHTFOOT, Justice scalia, lightfoot v bowen, natural born citizen, obama, obamahoax, orly taitz, POTUS, president obama, proobamedia, SCOTUS, The Constitution, usurper
March 23, 2009 at 5:59 AM
Alexander Mordecai Bickel was a noted legal scholar, law professor, and essayist who wrote extensively about Constitutional Law issues and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Bickel was born December 17, 1924, in Bucharest, Romania, and immigrated to the United States with his parents in 1939. He attended the City College of New York, graduating Phi Beta Kappa in 1947, and Harvard Law School, where he served as editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated summa cum laude in 1949.
Following law school, Bickel clerked for Judge Calvert Magruder of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston. From 1950 to 1952 he was a State Department law officer in Frankfurt, Germany, and he was a member of the European Defense Community Observer Delegation in Paris. He returned to the United States to become law clerk to Justice Felix Frankfurter during the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1952–53 term.
Bickel assisted Justice Frankfurter in the Court’s consideration of the landmark desegregation decision in brown v. board of education, 349 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873 (1954). The plaintiffs in Brown challenged the assignment of black and white students to separate public schools. The Court held that such racial Segregation in public education was unconstitutional. During his clerkship with Frankfurter, Bickel studied the Fourteenth Amendment extensively and concluded that the Constitution did provide that congressional or judicial action could be used to abolish school segregation.
After completing his clerkship with Justice Frankfurter, Bickel joined the faculty of Yale Law School, in 1956. He was named Chancellor Kent Professor of Law and Legal History in 1966, and Sterling Professor of Law in 1974, the year of his death.
Bickel wrote a number of influential books and essays. In addition to longer works, he published more than a hundred articles in newspapers and magazines. He edited The Unpublished Opinions of Mr. Justice Brandeis, a volume of eleven Brandeis draft opinions concerning the issue of judicial restraint, a major theme in much of Bickel’s later writings. In his most influential work, The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics (1963), Bickel argued that courts should make decisions that are grounded in history and in the values found in the Constitution, and should not make decisions that cannot gain public support. He believed that judges should exercise care to avoid deciding constitutional issues if other grounds for a ruling are available, such as grounds for refusing to hear the case or grounds for using doctrines like statutory construction to decide the case.
“[The judiciary is] the least dangerous branch of our government.”
—Alexander Bickel
In The Supreme Court and the Idea of Progress (1970), another work advocating judicial restraint, Bickel criticized the activism of the Warren Court in tackling social issues. He noted that “history has little tolerance for … [the Court's] reasonable judgments that turn out to be wrong.” Bickel also argued for judicial restraint in the so-called Pentagon Papers case, New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 91 S. Ct. 2140, 29 L. Ed. 2d 822 (1971), in which he represented the New York Times before the Supreme Court. In Pentagon Papers, the government sought to prevent the New York Times and the Washington Post from publishing the contents of a classified study titled History of U.S. Decision-Making Process on Viet Nam Policy. Rather than arguing that Prior Restraint of the publication of the classified material was unconstitutional, Bickel instead maintained that the government had been unable to rebut the heavy presumption against prior restraint and that such restraint was to be found in congressional legislation rather than in assertions of governmental power. The Court ultimately rejected the government’s claim that the papers should not be published, and several of the justices adopted Bickel’s analysis in their opinions.
A recognized expert on the Supreme Court of the United States, Bickel served as a member of the Study Group on the Caseload of the Supreme Court. In 1973, he authored The Case-load of the Supreme Court, and What, If Anything, to Do about It, in which he concluded that the Court’s caseload should be reduced. Easing the Court’s workload is critical, he argued, to ensure careful deliberation of important issues and to avoid transforming the Court “into a high-speed, high-volume enterprise” that would “mock the idea of justice and mock the substantive reforms of a generation.”
Further readings
Bickel, Alexander M. 1973. The Caseload of the Supreme Court and What, If Anything, to Do About It. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
——. 1970. The Supreme Court and the Idea of Progress. New York: Harper & Row.
March 23, 2009 at 6:05 AM
please snip previous post for brevity its posting, in that exhaustive lengthy form, was not intentional. it is premature or inappropriate at this stage in fact i merely, meant to ask whether the spelling of “Bickell”, as in “Danny” with the 2 “l”s was accurate
March 24, 2009 at 3:51 AM
Yes. His name is spelled: Bickell.
Danny Bickell
Deputy Clerk
Supreme Court of the United States
Washington, DC 20543
He was a speaker at the 30th annual conference of the Association of Government Attorneys in Capital Litigation.
March 24, 2009 at 4:02 AM
Interesting guy. Too bad Danny Boy Bickell isn’t related. He might not have been associated with an allegedly tampering.