Vol. 15 Issue No. 2 | January 14 – 20, 2009

Supreme Court denies petition in Berg v. Obama

By Linda Bentley | January 14, 2009

Michael New’s 13-year-old case becomes relevant as inauguration day nears

WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Jan. 8, a Joint Session of Congress counted the electoral votes and declared Barack Hussein Obama President of the United States, without a single member raising an objection.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Attorney Philip Berg’s petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment in his case challenging Obama’s eligibility.

In other words, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court denied review of Berg’s case prior to a ruling by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, where his case is still pending.

Berg expressed disappoint-ment and said, “I am committed to keep our efforts going to continue litigation until the truth of Obama being ‘not qualified’ for President comes out,” adding, “The Obama candidacy is the biggest hoax ever put forth to the citizens of the United States in 230 years.”

If Obama is sworn in, Berg said, “We will file a petition for Writ of Quo Warranto,” which he said will challenge Obama as being ineligible to serve as President because he is “not qualified.”

In conclusion, Berg stated, “There is nothing more important than ‘our’ U.S. Constitution and we will fight on!”

In addition to the current case before the U.S. Supreme Court, another case Berg filed against Obama two months ago is also pending, but because it is “under seal” he could not comment further.

The interpleader action filed by Berg on Dec. 31, 2008, on behalf of Gregory S. Hollister, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel, against Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama, in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, questions whether or not Hollister should obey an order if recalled to duty, without the question of Obama’s legitimacy settled.

Hollister was nearing retirement when Michael New’s case was filed 13 years ago.

In February 1993 at the age of 20, New enlisted in the United States Army in Conroe, Texas.

In August 1995, New, along with 549 other soldiers, were ordered to wear the blue caps of the United Nations along with the blue U.N. insignia patch on their right shoulder.

On Oct. 10, 1995, in Schweinfurt, Germany, while the other 549 U.S. Army soldiers came to attention wearing the U.N. emblem on blue caps and the U.N. patches on their right shoulder, New arrived wearing his regulation U.S. Army uniform, including the olive-drab flat cap authorized to be worn with the Battle Dress Uniform.

New was immediately culled out of formation, informed he would be facing court-martial and read his rights.

In January 1996, New received a “Bad Conduct Discharge” which marked the beginning of a 12-year odyssey through the legal system. More about New’s case can be found at www.mikenew.com.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review his case, New’s refusal to obey an unconstitutional order to wear the uniform of the United Nations also posed the following questions:

When is obedience to an order treason?

Can an American soldier be forced to serve a foreign power?

If Obama is sworn in as President of the United States on Jan. 20, those currently serving in the military, along with those such as Hollister, who could be called back to duty at any time, will need to decide for themselves if orders from the new Commander-in-Chief are legitimate or those of a usurper intent on doing the United States harm.

So far, the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to weigh in.

Attorney Orly Taitz’s case in Lightfoot v. Bowen, regarding Obama’s eligibility to appear on the ballot as a presidential candidate, has been distributed for the U.S. Supreme Court Conference of Jan. 23.

In the interim, Taitz said she will request that the U.S. Supreme Court justices recuse themselves from swearing Obama in on Jan. 20.

Courtesy Photo: Army Spc. Michael New