Tag Archives: lawsuit

Relying on Article VI of the US Constitution, former Teacher files lawsuit against Public Schools

US Constitution - We The People

ORWIGSBURG, Penn., Oct. 30, 2013 /Christian Newswire/ — Tom Ritter, a retired public school academic physics and chemistry teacher, has filed a lawsuit (in Dauphin County) seeking the courts to require that all public schools charge “fair” tuition.

(The effect will be to end public education in America, produce a blossoming of private schools and end school taxes.)

His reasoning:

  1. Many First Amendment rights (including, but not limited to, prayers before meals) are inextricably tied to the education of one’s children.
  2. For many people, the only way to exercise these freedoms is to send their children to a private school.
  3. The government restricts these schools (First Amendment rights) by charging no tuition in its own schools.

(As the late Nobel laureate in economics, Dr. Milton Freidman, put it: “Try selling a product that someone else is giving away!” — The New York Times Magazine, Sept. 23, 1975)

Ritter also relies on Article VI of the US Constitution:

“This Constitution…shall be the supreme Law of the Land…any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Of course the First Amendment is part of the Constitution.

The Question of Obama’s Eligibility to Serve as President Picks Up Steam

The question of the eligibility of Barack Obama to appear on the 2012 Presidential ballot has picked up steam as lawsuits have been filed in Federal and State District Courts to force the Democrat National Committee, its Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid to show positive proof that Obama meets the parameters laid out by the Constitution of the United States of America to hold said office. These events have somehow escaped the eagle eyes of the main stream media, but have been widely reported throughout the internet news media.

The Liberty Legal Foundation/Dummett lawsuits center around the citizenship of Obama’s father and the “natural born citizen” statute found in Article II Section 1 Paragraph 5 of the United States Constitution. Unlike similar lawsuits that have failed in the past, Mr. Dummett has been granted standing by the Ninth Circuit Court due to his candidacy for the office of President of the United States of America. Mr. Dummett is also suing the Democrat National Committee and its representatives rather than suing government entities as has been done in the past.

In hearings before the Ninth Circuit Court in San Francisco, the justices determined Mr. Dummett could be harmed by a candidate not constitutionally eligible to run for the office of President. The court allowed Liberty Legal and Mr. Dummett to proceed with their suits, declaring Mr. Dummett has standing as a legally registered candidate for the office.

One report on this issue comes from the site Maggie’s Notebook on December 30, 2011,  which lists excerpts of the actual filing by Liberty Legal Foundation’s Van Irions as well as copies of the forms submitted by the DNC in 2008. The wording of the 2008 forms has been brought into question as two copies differ in the wording of the certification of candidate Obama. The lawsuit filed by Liberty Legal seeks to enjoin the DNC and any Democrat official from certifying Obama as an eligible candidate without first proving he is indeed eligible according to the provisions laid out in the Constitution.

Lawsuits have been filed by Mr. Dummett and Liberty Legal Foundation in The United States District Court for the District of Arizona , and in the Chancery Court for the State of Tennessee . Copies of the suits can be seen at the links listed above.

In a related story, New York voter Robert Laity on December 2, 2011 filed a “Challenge Petition” with the New York State Board of Elections, alleging that Obama’s 2008 election resulted from fraud and that he is not eligible to appear on the ballot in 2012. According to the Post & Email article Laity has also been in contact with New York governor Andrew Cuomo and his state senator, Mark Grisanti, on this matter. The Post & Email blog site conducted an interview with Mr. Laity that can be found at this link, along with correspondence Mr. Laity has exchanged with Governor Cuomo’s office.

In Georgia, Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell have filed a separate lawsuit, also contending Barack Obama does not meet the “natural born citizen” requirement of the Constitution and asking that Obama’s name not be allowed to appear on the ballot of the State of Georgia. The suit also asks that they be considered separately from several others who have filed similar lawsuits in Georgia. Liberty Legal Foundation is also involved in the Georgia suit, which is scheduled to be heard on January 26, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.

A related story at the Politics Today website details Obama’s Occidental College transcripts, including Obama’s Fullbright Scholarship, requiring a student to certify that he/she is a foreign student. The story at Politics Today also documents Obama’s passport and travel history. They also reported that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments on a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey concerning Obama’s eligibility to serve as President. This is one of many lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility, including those brought by Liberty Legal Foundation and Dummett.

Efforts to contact the DNC, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schutlz, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and Sen. Harry Reid were met with an array of “go away and don’t bother us” tactics. The DNC representative knew nothing about this matter, and when asked to be put through to someone who does know, the CDN reporter was put on hold and then heard a dial tone. The staff at the offices of the members of Congress said that not only did they not know about this matter, they did not talk about any issue not directly related to constituent needs.

Bob Russell
Claremore, Oklahoma
January 4, 2011

Loser of Election Sues – Has It Come To This?


Anyone can sue anyone, but this is ridiculous. Voters in Ohio’s 1st Congressional District did not reelect first term Democrat Steve Driehaus (D-OH). So, rather than leave office gracefully, he chose to sue! He filed a lawsuit against the Susan B. Anthony List (SBA), a group that supports pro-life candidates for Congress. It has also been one of the most effective organizations involved in the fight to stop federal funding to Planned Parenthood. Driehaus is suing the Susan B. Anthony List under a Ohio’s False Statement Law for “loss of livelihood.” Driehaus’s suit is breaking new legal ground, and may already be inhibiting political speech. It goes directly at the heart of our First Amendment protections, and criminalizes what is a difference of opinion. The Susan B. Anthony List’s characterization of Driehaus as unconcerned with protecting the pro-life stance is not unfounded. One cannot be mad at the facts. So, as long as the attacks are not outright lies, then they are protected under the First Amendment. Driehaus’ lawsuit has absolutely no claim on which to stand.

Driehaus first filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission, but he dropped the complaint in mid-November, 2010. He then filed a federal lawsuit. “I have chosen to proceed against the SBA List in federal court because the issue at stake goes beyond the purview of the Ohio Elections Commission,” Driehaus said. “As more and more interests are able to anonymously spend unlimited sums of money in attempts to defame public servants and influence our elections, it is imperative that groups such as the SBA List be held to account for their behavior. Lies have consequences.” There are many things said during political campaigns that subsequently prove untrue. What the Susan B. Anthony List said about pro-life Democrats, such as Driehaus, who gave Obama the votes he needed to pass healthcare just doesn’t happen to be one of them.

Driehaus claims that what the Susan B. Anthony List said in its public communications amounted to a malicious lie that contributed to his defeat. What is most amazing is that, rather than laugh the suit out of court, U.S. District Court Judge Timothy S. Black, an Obama appointee, is allowing it to go forward. And Judge Timothy Black is the former president and director of the Planned Parenthood Association of Cincinnati. Why he doesn’t recuse himself from this case is a mystery. We can question Black’s ability to be impartial if he used to head up the local affiliate of the Planned Parenthood Association.

The Susan B. Anthony List must now pay an attorney to defend against this lawsuit. I think the time has come for the lawsuit loser to pay ALL court proceedings and reimburse the winner’s expenses. Further, why has the MSM has largely ignored this case.

But that’s just my opinion.