Orly had better put a few dozen more PayPal links up on her site. She has pushed her luck with the court.
Judge Clay Land threw Orly's cast out of court this week. Her response was to file an emergency motion in which she dissed the Judge right and left as described in NoVa Boy's diary.
Judge Hand has responded with a seven page Order that begins:
"It was deja vu all over again."
In her most recent tirade, Plaintiff’s counsel seeks
reconsideration of the Court’s order dismissing this action.2 Instead
of seriously addressing the substance of the Court’s order, counsel
repeats her political diatribe against the President, complains that
she did not have time to address dismissal of the action (although
she sought expedited consideration), accuses the undersigned of
treason, and maintains that "the United States District Courts in the
11th Circuit are subject to political pressure, external control, and
. . . subservience to the same illegitimate chain of command which
Plaintiff has previously protested." ... This filing contemptuously ignores the Court’s previous admonition that Plaintiff’s counsel discontinue her illegitimate use of the federal judiciary to further her political agenda. The Court finds that the claims and legal contentions asserted in the present motion are not warranted by existing law and that no reasonable basis exists to conclude that Plaintiff’s arguments would be accepted as an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law. Simply, put the motion is frivolous. Moreover, the Court further finds that Plaintiff’s motion is being presented for the improper purpose of using the federal judiciary as a platform to espouse controversial political beliefs rather than as a legitimate forum for hearing legal claims. Counsel’s conduct violates Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and sanctions are warranted.
If counsel had carefully read the Court’s order,
she would have understood that the Court dismissed the Complaint
based upon abstention principles. Furthermore, competent counsel
would have understood that the Court was required to address abstention prior to ruling upon the motion for a temporary
restraining order.
Finally, it is clear that Plaintiff’s counsel seeks to continue to use the federal judiciary as a platform to further her political "birther agenda."4 She has provided no legal or factual basis for the Court to interfere with deployment orders of the United States
Army. She supports her claims with subjective belief, speculation
and conjecture, which have never been sufficient to maintain a legal
cause of action. She continues to file motions that do not address
legal issues but that describe the President as a "prevaricator,"
allege that the President’s father was "disloyal and possibly
treacherous" to the "British Crown," accuse the undersigned of
treason, and suggest that the United States District Courts in this
Circuit are "subservient" to the "illegitimate" "de facto President."
Although the First Amendment may allow Plaintiff’s counsel to make
these wild accusations on her blog or in her press conferences, the
federal courts are reserved for hearing genuine legal disputes and
not as a platform for political rhetoric that is disconnected from
any legitimate legal cause of action.
CONCLUSION
The Court finds Plaintiff’s Motion for Stay of Deployment to be frivolous. Therefore, it is denied. The Court notifies Plaintiff’s counsel, Orly Taitz, that it is contemplating a monetary
penalty of $10,000.00 to be imposed upon her, as a sanction for her
misconduct. Ms. Taitz shall file her response within fourteen days
of today’s order showing why this sanction should not be imposed.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 18th day of September, 2009.
S Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
I have to admit, I'm enjoying this.