LETTER TO THE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES IN SUPPORT OF PHILIP A. BERG'S CHALLENGE FOR DISCOVERY OF FACTS PERTAINING TO PRESIDENT ELECT BARACK OBAMA'S TRUE CITIZENSHIP STATUS AND QUALIFICATIONS TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE USA. 31 December 2008
Stephen M. St. John
Post Office Box 449
New York, New York 10185
212 534 5024 & 917 519 2905
metatron.metatron@verizon.net
www.show-the-house.com
31 December 2008
Chief Justice John G. Roberts
The Supreme Court of the United States
1 First Street NE
Washington, DC 20543
Dear Chief Justice Roberts,
I write both to express my support for Philip J. Berg, whose case number 08-570, Berg v Obama, is set for conferences on 9 & 16 January 2009, and to urge you to regard this case as a matter of great moment and urgency and requiring a pro-active stance to meet unusual circumstances.
Mr. Berg is a selfless individual acting in the best interests of our nation so that the rule of law prevails. He is a knowledgeable and capable advocate driven by faith and conviction, and seems only to have gained momentum after pausing to bury his dear brother Norman earlier this month.
Yet the high noon appointment on 20 January 2009, when the new term of our next President begins, is fast approaching and Mr. Berg's arguments, based on facts and laws pertaining to the citizenship status and qualifications of the President Elect, Barack Obama, to be President, have still not been heard!
The controlling law for this deplorable situation is Section 3 of Amendment XX of our Constitution.
Simple discovery and verification of facts as they pertain to laws of citizenship and basic qualifications to be President of the USA have been unfairly stonewalled in many ways. For this deficiency we risk a Constitutional crisis where a usurper compromises by his fraud the validity of his actions as President of the United States. There is no higher priority for our nation than to be sure that this does not happen!
To prevent such a dangerous condition, I urge that you go beyond the usual review of the lower court case, which is hooked on the issue of proper standing, and go right to the kernel of Mr. Berg's argument on the laws and facts pertaining to Barack Obama's citizenship status and qualifications to be President.
Mr. Berg's supererogation in a very grave matter touching on our national security fills a vast void left by officials whose duty it is to address matters of qualifications of candidates for office. So when the vagaries of partisan politics blunt the plain, intended effect of the Constitution of the USA, and a champion of the people arises to enforce elementary components of this basic social contract, he deserves an attentive, benevolent and docile audience on our highest bench.
Senate Resolution 511, which then Senator Barack Obama signed, confirmed the status of John McCain as a "natural born citizen" of the USA who is eligible, under Article II, Section 1, to be President. This resolution suggests that Section 5 of Article I ("Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own members") includes senators and representatives who become candidates for the US Presidency. If Berg doesn't have proper standing to demonstrate how the US Senate was remiss in its collective duty to monitor one of its very own, then who does?
More broadly, Article VI of our Constitution states that "The Senators and Representatives … shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution." Supporting this Constitution implies seeing that there is no doubt whatsoever that any candidate for the Presidency of the USA is indeed a "natural born citizen" and therefore eligible to be President. The US Senate did not do this. The US House of Representatives did not do this. Philip J. Berg is doing this.
Where partisan politics threatens to smother due process of the law and allow fraud and force to prevail, shouldn't we consider that "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people"? Amendment IX of our Constitution denies any attempt to seal hermetically Philip J. Berg from the supreme Law of our Land and blunt his noble endeavor to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution when others have failed to follow the law. Citizens of the USA are directly connected to the Constitution of the USA and have a compelling interest in seeing that it is respected and followed by all, especially by one who intends to make the solemn affirmation prescribed for Presidents on 20 January 2009.
Stephen M. St. John
Copies to: Chief Justice John Roberts
Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito
Associate Justice Clarence Thomas
Associate Justice Antonin Scalia
Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy
Associate Justice David H. Souter
Associate Justice John Paul Stevens
Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer
Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg
Philip J. Berg, Esquire
**********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
For more information visit http://www.show-the-house.com/id69.html.
Submitted by Stephen M. St. John on Mon, 2009-01-05 16:24
- Stephen M. St. John's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 170 reads
-
