Update - Lightfoot v. Bowen, Set for 1/23 Conference, Disappears [Temporarily] from Supreme Court Docket

Update 1/23 am by Zapem, from Comments, emphasis by I.O.:

I personally checked 15 cases on the Pending Order's List myself and found those to be on the docket and fully visible from the database. I did not find any cases which were missing other than the eligibility contest cases as noted in this article.

The bottom line here is, while the Petitioners in these cases have been treated worse than second-class citizens, slandered on websites and belittled by the media without remorse, I find it ironic that no one seems to care if a President of the United States is held to the mere standard of Factcheck.org.

Update 1/22: Docket listings are back up, at the Supreme Court site. This has been another in a line of odd occurrences at the courts, pertaining to the eligibility requirement cases.

Update 1/21: Apparently, all docket items regarding Obama eligibility have disappeared but one Berg item. Received by email from Zapem:

All the cases on Obama's eligibility, even the pending ones, have been removed from the SCOTUS website.

One remains only to say that Berg v. Obama was dismissed today. http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm

Donofrio, Wrotnowski, Schneller, Berg applications and Lightfoot all removed. I checked the other 2008 cases having nothing to do with Obama and those are still there. Something is going on.

Original Post, 1/21:

Not Found

The requested URL /docket/08a524.htm was not found on this server.

That is what now appears on the Supreme Court Web site, for the docket page of Lightfoot v. Bowen (http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a524.htm).

Here is Lightfoot attorney, Orly Taitz' post about it, from her blog.

Obama has been in power only one day and they are already playing games with the Supreme Court

Obama has been in power only one day. Suddenly today my case has disappeared from the docket. The case was not dismissed. It is supposed to be heard on the 23rd of January. Each and every American Citizen needs to call the Supreme court and demand decency from these Justices. They have violated all principles of judicial integrity and ethics by inviting Obama and Biden to the closed door meeting only a few days before the hearing. They have inaugurated him in from of millions of people, when 3 days after the inauguration they are supposed to hear my case, where I state that Obama is not eligible for presidency and never was eligible. They were supposed to recuse themselves from the inauguration. What is going on? Is Chicago mafia influencing the Supreme Court? If we don't have integrity with our elected officials and the whole system is corrupt, then it is time to revolt and change the system.

Posted by Orly Taitz, DDS Esq. at 3:09 PM 3 comments

More about this will likely be posted in updates, below, as I.O. finds more to post. In the meantime, I also suggest you look into The Right Side of Life and its overall status page, "Eligibility Lawsuits," regarding news of other suits.

This is how the docket appeared before it vanished.

No. 08A524
Title: Gail Lightfoot, et al., Applicants
v.
Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State

Docketed:
Lower Ct: Supreme Court of California
Case Nos.: (S168690)

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dec 12 2008 Application (08A524) for a stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Dec 17 2008 Application (08A524) denied by Justice Kennedy.
Dec 29 2008 Application (08A524) refiled and submitted to The Chief Justice.
Jan 7 2009 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 23, 2009.
Jan 7 2009 Application (08A524) referred to the Court.
Jan 13 2009 Suggestion for recusal received from applicant.


~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioners:
Orly Taitz 26302 La Paz (949) 683-5411
Counsel of Record Mission Viejo, CA 92691
Party name: Gail Lightfoot, et al.

This was relayed by FReeper, "cacoethes_resipisco" from a Google search cache, through this URL:
http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:QQDxe2U7EZwJ:origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a524.htm+lightfoot+bowen+docket&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

ht: dl

Week 1/4-1/10; Path to BHO Breakthrough or Constitutional Travesty

A week's worth of naturally borne Citizenship in action, with I.O's agenda in the flux

1. Congress voted Thursday, to "certify" the E.C. vote for The Unkown, Unvetted, Usurping President.
2. Friday, 1/9, the Supreme Court of the U.S. (SCOTUS) apparently conferred about what to do with pesky Philip Berg. Do they now deign to grant him standing, this mere Sovereign Citizen? Then, on the 1/16, he gets another meeting of the Supreme How 'Bout That BOGUS POTUS Committee. Is Tom Waite right and does SCOTUS not like it that BHO has not responded to Souter's prior... invitation? [Ed. 1/12: even if Souter really did not want to invite attention; it is SCOTUS procedure to receive responses from defendants.]
   
3. By Mr. Phil's TRSoL report, Berg v. Obama was not dealt a miscellaneous order Friday. SCOTUS disposition should be announced Monday, as is customary. Phil does a great job of putting this into perspective, here.
   
4. Attorney, Orly Taitz appreciates that Chief Justice John Roberts has sent Lightfoot v. Bowen (SCOTUS docket page) to committee for 1/23. Wednesday's I.O. article and interview with Taitz here. Also, Orly Taitz' subsequent press release, over there. She exhorts more letters and other petitions from concerned Americans. Her cover letter to Roberts was an interesting move; maybe it helped, at least in citing some of the known references to the meaning of the Article 2 phrase, natural born Citizen. Be apprised, now: this Lightfoot is not a petition for writ of certiorari, it is an appeal for an injunction against the California Electoral College vote, which has already happened. To I.O's ken, Dr. Taitz will need assistance from someone licensed to present before the SCOTUS, if she wishes to petition for a writ (for full review, oral argument, and quite possibly, for such a thing as a reversal of an unconstitutional election). She describes Lightfoot v. Bowen as a "step," but at least it is a step to bring a federal candidate's standing, along with two of the three arguments against Obama's candidacy to the SCOTUS and we are in uncharged jurisprudential waters.
   
5. Orly Taitz is in hyperdrive. Maybe we should all pray for her safety.
   
6. What has been transpiring in other cases?: Obama legal challenge scorecard
   
7. Well, Broe v. Reed was dismissed, Thursday by the WA Supremes, which notified the local media instead of that first, before any contact with Broe attorney, Stephen Pidgeon, if at all. Huh. And to the SCOTUS Pidgeon will fly. He thinks the WA court, like their Secretary of State may just be saying, "'S'not my job, man" and for some reason does not feel encumbered with the qualifying of a presidential candidiate. If so, they hide in a nationwide cloud of confusion, due to lack of legislative procedure to support the natural born Citizenshp clause and that causes a further confusion regarding "controlling legal authority" (as Al Gore appreciators might remember, i.e., how he avoided prison, per his past foreign fundraising, Hindu monks and all). In Broe v. Reed, Pidgeon refers to all of the three major contentions with BHO II: 1. U.K. citizenship at birth via BHO I, 2. no valid proof of natural born Citizenship provided and, 3. apparent Indonesian citizenship as a child, revoking any U.S. citizenship. Pidgeon's Broe case did receive oral argument by the WA SC, which may help in terms of standing (with all the various "objective" elements for SCOTUS to consider, you do know that, at least for those justices unwilling or unable to apply the finest of epistemological categorization of constitutional law with natural accuracy, a lot of this is subjective for them, don't you?).
   
8. Schneller v. Cortes (based upon no valid proof of n.b.C. by Obama) was taken from Pennsylvania to Justice Souter, Thursday, in the attempt to delay the congressional certification of the Electoral College vote and whaddyaknow, Souter denied.
   
9. I.O. still finds it more than "odd" that after Donofrio was given the run-around by the SCOTUS clerks and Wrotnowski's filing was sent away for "anthrax testing," Taitz' Lightfoot filing was "lost" before Christmas. Perhaps more on that, later.
   
10. PlainsRadio.com-ops: may get to that later, priorities are priorities.
11. Does the narrative of August, 1961 in the life of Stanley Ann Dunham fit the possibility of a birth outside the U.S.A.? Sam Sewell of The Steady Drip presents, below
    
12. Do you know why it shouldn't matter and that BHO is ineligible, anyway? More on this, all over Investigating Obama. Click the "I.O. Docket" index on the sidebar, or the lazy click here).
13. How about that new kind of case, some have heard about, boiling up in a conservative state? Something having to do with the military? Must be taking a bit more time.
    
14. Those Top-5 "Daddy Says No!" nbC article awards that I.O. has not found the time to do yet... um... see the line-up of natural born Citizen articles, here.
15. Beyond the essential crisis-solving necessary to preserve the U.S. Constitution, against an usurpation by an ineligible candidate, why does it matter that Barack Obama is kept out of the Presidency? Answer, here.
    
16. Read up on Obama researcher, Mark S. McGrew's outrage, below -- and hear him on Internet radio
17. FoxNews is featuring... Casey Anthony a lot, lately. Fox asks why it is that she did not reveal what she knew about her daughter's disappearance and points out that, in itself, is incriminating. I.O. points out, this sounds like Obama and his Hawaiian birth certificate, does it not?
    
18. What? BHO Continues to Press His Mega-Money Fundraising?
    
19. Keep an eye on that I.O. Sitebar Sidebar, especially "The Unconstitutional Usurper" lineup:

Interview, Orly Taitz: Chief Justice Roberts Calls Conference on Obama Challenge: Lightfoot v. Bowen

Breaking...

by Arlen Williams, 1/7/2009

Chief Justice John Roberts has sent a full-throated challenge of Barack Obama's presidential eligibility to conference: Lightfoot v. Bowen (SCOTUS docket page). I.O. interviewed Lightfoot lead attorney, Orly Taitz at 2:20pm CT, today, minutes after she learned of this move.

Taitz believes, "This is Chief Justice Roberts telling the Congress... the other eight Justices, that there is a problem with this election."

The Lightfoot case has legal standing, due to litigant, Libertarian Gail Lightfoot's vice presidential candidacy in California. It also addresses two major issues of legal merit: 1. Obama's failure to provide legally evidentiary documentation of citizenship and American birth and, 2. his United Kingdom citizenship at birth, passed to him by his Kenyan father when that nation was a British colony. (Other current challenges also submit that Obama's apparent status as an Indonesian citizen, as a child, would have caused his American citizenship to be revoked.) This case is therefore considered the strongest yet, to be heard by the Supreme Court. Obama challenger, Philp Berg had previously been granted conference hearings, scheduled this Friday, 1/9 and on 1/16.

Roberts was submitted this case on 12/29, originally a petition for an injunction against the State of California's Electoral College vote. His action comes one day before the Congress is to certify the Electoral College votes electing Barack Obama, 1/8. The conference called by Roberts is scheduled for 1/23. Orly Taitz is not deterred by the conference coming after the inauguration, which is to be held 1/20, "If they find out that he was not eligible, then they can actually rescind the election; the whole inauguration and certification were not valid." The strongest time for legal and judicial rulings are generally after the fact.

Taitz reacts to this new event as a project manager, "We'll continue working, one step at a time. Now we need to get the word out to all the media, congressmen, senators." It remains to be seen whether the "major media" will deign to cover this story, or continue to mainly report news that is negative as it pertains to natural born Citizen actions addressing Obama.

"They will hear the case, then, if they find out... Obama was elected fraudulently, they will find out the whole process was not valid." Taits calls this conference itself an important hearing and then, "I think that we'll have four Justices, then it will go to oral arguments and all American Citizens will be able to hear the case." In such a conference, four Supreme Court Justices of the nine must vote for certiorari -- to have a full review generally including a public hearing. However, the Lightfoot filing is not at this point a petition for a writ of certiorari. In theory, the court may issue an order of the court regarding the process, or pertaining to a then, apparent President Obama's standing.

Taitz stressed that the public must know immediately about matters that may have been hidden in Barack Obama's candidacy, citing one example, that, "Most of the country has no clue that one relative can go to the state of Hawaii and sign an affidavit that 'my relative was born a citizen'" and thus gain an Hawaiian birth certificate for that person, even if he were born abroad. That is the same kind of birth certificate that Barack Obama has not allowed to be seen, but which Hawaiian state officials have reported exists in privately held state records.

The earlier Lightfoot petition to the California State Supreme Court for a stay of that state's Electoral College election had been denied at that level.

One of many potentially odd twists to monitor in this electoral process is that as of Friday, 1/2, the National Archives had received Electoral College votes from only twenty-four of fifty states, not nearly enough votes for Congress to count, tomorrow for an election.

Investigating Obama will continue to monitor this and related cases, and link to news and examinations of them, from other newsworthy sites. The Web site of Orly Taitz relates her perspective, further. Readers are free to repost or excerpt this article.