The case law is clear that Quo Warranto against a Public Office can ONLY be filed by the Attorney General. This is yet another reason why Orly Taitz’s motion to transfer the case is without merit.
The cases which hold that a taxpayer may not test the authority of a public officer by writ of quo warranto4 are not relevant here. They involve a right belonging to the whole body of the public which can be protected only by a public representative. The distinction has been well stated as follows:5 “In the strictest sense, the usurpation of a public office and the abuse of a public franchise are not, at common law, private injuries, and the remedy by quo warranto must be on the suggestion of the attorney general * * *; but in questions involving merely the administration of corporate functions, and not to dissolve the corporation, as the election of officers, quo warranto may issue at the suit of the attorney general, or of any person or persons having an interest injuriously affected and desiring to prosecute the same. * * *”
Source: United States v. Carmody, 148 F.2d 684 (D.C. Cir., 1945)
4. Newman v. United States, 1915, 238 U.S. 537, 35 S.Ct. 881, 59 L.Ed. 1446.
5. Ferris, Extraordinary Legal Remedies, 1926, § 123; State ex rel. Mitchell v. Horan, 1900, 22 Wash. 197, 60 P. 135.
The Flying Monkeys will never be able to comprehend this…not in this or any other lifetime.
They might comprehend it, but they won’t accept it. Their view of what they think the law should be is the only thing that matters to them.
That is the scary part…they want their “view” applied to the rest of the normal and well adjusted Citizens of America, not just the citizens of Birfistan…and I have a huge problem with their View!
And they threaten armed insurrection if their “view” is not accepted.