Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Birther queen bee Orly Taitz has finally pushed a judge far enough that he hit her with sanctions. This was fairly inevitable, since he ordered her to show cause why she should not be sanctioned and she responded by accusing him of treason and filing even more frivolous crap with the court. And Judge Land minced few words in his ruling.
When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for a political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer personally attacks opposing parties and disrespects the integrity of the judiciary, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer recklessly accuses a judge of violating the Judicial Code of Conduct with no supporting evidence beyond her dissatisfaction with the judge's rulings, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law, that lawyer ceases to advance her cause or the ends of justice...Her response to the Court's show cause order is breathtaking in its arrogance and borders on delusional. She expresses no contrition or regret regarding her misconduct. To the contrary, she continues her baseless attacks on the Court. Defiantly defending the "position of the patriots," she scoffs at the notion that a federal court would consider sanctioning her when she is on the side of such freedom fighters as the late Justice Thurgood Marshall, a comparison that, if accepted, would disgrace Justice Marshall's singular achievements. Counsel's bad faith warrants a substantial sanction.
Counsel's misconduct was not an isolated event; it was part of a pattern that advanced frivolous arguments and disrespectful personal attacks on the parties and the Court. This pattern infected the entire proceeding, not just an isolated pleading. Her initial
Complaint was legally frivolous. Upon being so informed, counsel followed it with a frivolous motion for reconsideration. In response to the Court's show cause order, she filed a frivolous motion to recuse. In all of counsel's frivolous filings, she hurled personal
insults at the parties and the Court. Rather than assert legitimate legal arguments, counsel chose to accuse the Court of treason and of being controlled by the "Obama Machine." She had no facts to support her claims-but her diatribe would play well to her choir. This pattern of conduct reveals that it will be difficult to get counsel's attention. A significant sanction is necessary to deter such conduct.
But in fact, he still hasn't gotten her attention.
Still defiant after months of legal wrangling and, by our count, three written denunciations by federal district court Judge Clay Land, Taitz said she had absolutely no plans to pay the $20,000 fine."Are you kidding? Of course not," she said, asked whether she planned to send a check. "This is a form of intimidation."
Instead, she plans to file yet another written response (though it's unclear whether the court will even accept one).
"I'll go to the circuit court of appeals. I'll take this as high as I have to go," Taitz said.
Every new motion she files should double the penalty.
Politics
Comments
The opinion is very well-written. As a lawyer, I believe all first year law students should be required to read it.
Posted by: Brandon | October 14, 2009 9:27 AM
Any guesses as to how long it will take for her legion of fans to cough up 20 grand? Of course, if she refuses to pay, they might need to post bail ...
Posted by: wheatdogg | October 14, 2009 9:29 AM
The only remaining question is when the California Bar Association is going to lift this fucktards' license to practice law. I would highly recommend that the readers of this blog read the judges' entire opinion which makes Judge Jones' opinion of the defendants in the Dover trial look mild by comparison. Hopefully, Judge Clark in California will get off his ass and dismiss the frivolous law suit there forthwith.
http://www.tips-q.com/files/taitz.pdf
Posted by: SLC | October 14, 2009 9:33 AM
Please let her be found in contempt and go to jail.
Pleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleaseplease
That is all. =)
Posted by: FastLane | October 14, 2009 9:50 AM
Jeez, it really looks to me like he's setting her up to be disbarred.
Posted by: NoAstronomer | October 14, 2009 9:51 AM
She's gotten a well deserved (if light) punishment with hope of a harsher penalty to come. Jail anyone?
Oddly, WND has dropped it's 'birther' section to the bottom of the page although they do highlight that Taitz is being mocked. Of course she's being mocked. She's eminently mockable: law school by mail, filing unsigned or incomplete papers with courts, clients firing her or claiming she asked them to lie, pushing obviously fraudulent documents as proof, the list goes on and on. Mock away!
And where in all this is Phil Berg? Didn't he have some complaint against Taitz too?
Posted by: MikeMa | October 14, 2009 9:57 AM
From one of her fans:
http://oilforimmigration.org/
Posted by: Alan B. | October 14, 2009 10:01 AM
It's pretty funny that she thinks she'll have a choice in the matter of paying the $20,000.
Posted by: Henry | October 14, 2009 10:15 AM
The opinion was very readable by layman's standards -- I read through the whole thing. Best of all he agreed with me that the judiciary has no role to play in removing a sitting president from office (comment I made here on July 17th) -- it's a role reserved for congress.
Posted by: Zippy the Pinhead | October 14, 2009 10:22 AM
The original sanctions were in the amount of $10k. Her response pissed him off so much (and, hey, what's not to love about being accused of treason?) that he doubled the amount.
This kind of reminds me of parenting a toddler...Judge Land did order that a copy of his ruling be sent to the California Bar Association, so maybe they'll put Taitz in timeout?
Posted by: Cathy W | October 14, 2009 10:31 AM
Taitz is refusing to pay, so the court will try collecting against her VERY soon. "Hysterical" won't begin to describe her reaction when her shit gets repossessed to pay the sanction.
The sanctions plus her perjury(among other things) in the trial could easily get her disbarred in California-since being admitted to the bar in at least 1 state is a requisite of being admitted pro hac vice anywhere else, this could end her involvement in Birther suits beyond being a kook commentator. Maybe a plaintiff.
Posted by: Matt | October 14, 2009 10:37 AM
Yes, Ms. Taitz, it is. Judge Land has people with guns (Federal Marshals) to enforce his decisions in what is still the ultimate power game. It's the ultimate clue-by-four, and it seems that this particular mule is just dumb enough to require its application to get her attention.
Whether we like it or not, Chairman Mao was correct in one thing: all power does flow from the barrel of a gun.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | October 14, 2009 10:40 AM
I must admit, I'm torn. Would I rather see Orly pay out of pocket or get it from the fools who donate to her?
Posted by: JusticeLeague | October 14, 2009 10:56 AM
Her response ... borders on delusional.
How, ah, judicious of Judge Land not to specify which side of the border Taitz occupies.
Perhaps the authorities on her side might, just by the nature of where they are, grant her a passport, but who over here would ever sponsor her visa application? (That of course presupposes she'd ever want to visit, for which there seems to be no evidence.)
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | October 14, 2009 11:25 AM
The opinion is very well-written.
It's well-written, thorough, well-reasoned--and hilarious. Seriously--one of the best things I've read lately, on several levels.
Posted by: Solly Hofman | October 14, 2009 11:29 AM
"…Orly does feel that this is further evidence that the U.S. Judiciary is subject to political pressures analogous to her “memories of life in the former Soviet Union…” and right she is."
In Soviet Russia, lawsuit files you!
Posted by: djfav | October 14, 2009 11:42 AM
Does anyone know if we could trick her into saying "Ztiat Ylro" aloud so she could be returned to her own dimension?
Posted by: Prup (aka Jim Benton) | October 14, 2009 11:43 AM
In Soviet Russia, lawsuit files you!
PERHAPS ORLY'S LAYING THE GROUNDWORK FOR HANGING OUT HER OWN SHINGLE IN BRANSON!!!
Posted by: FBI Regional Bureau Chief GORDON COLE!!! | October 14, 2009 11:49 AM
In Soviet Russia, legal ethics violate YOU!
Posted by: Solly Hofman | October 14, 2009 11:55 AM
I quite enjoyed this footnote on page 27:
The Court does not make this observation(1) simply as a rhetorical device for emphasis; the Court has actually received correspondence assailing its previous order in which the sender, who, incidentally, challenged the undersigned to "a round of fisticuffs on the Courthouse square," asserted that the president is not human.
(1-footnote added by me) - [that a citizen might seek to force DNA testing of the president to make him prove that he is not from Mars]
Posted by: Lee | October 14, 2009 12:19 PM
Unfortunately, the fine will only inspire more reverence from her delusional birther cohorts. She's a martyr for the cause. That said, she should be denied the privilege of practicing law.
Posted by: barry21 | October 14, 2009 12:26 PM
Another gem:
Posted by: James Sweet | October 14, 2009 12:42 PM
Solly Hofman,
What he said.
Posted by: ThirtyFiveUp | October 14, 2009 1:04 PM
After having read the entire ruling by the judge, I have come to the conclusion that Ms. Taitz is not just crazy, she is also very very stupid.
It is not her persistence or her blindness to reality that leads me to say this; it is her abject failure to make even a modest attempt at addressing the specific legal issues in the case.
IANAL, so if I were to put myself in Ms. Taitz' shoes (oh dear god...) it is likely that I would have been unfamiliar with the concept of abstention, Rule 11, and other details that have been raised in this case. However, if I were foolhardy enough to ask for a reconsideration, I surely would have made at least a half-hearted attempt to address the judge's points directly -- even if I disagreed with their premise. You see lawyers do this all the time, e.g. "The plaintiff's position on X is not correct because of Y -- but even if X were correct, the court should still rule in my favor because of Z."
For instance, in regards to the abstention issue, I might cite Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, a case where a federal appeals court decline the governments request to abstain, interpreted Ex parte Quirin thusly: "the Court, far from abstaining... [may] expedite its review because of...the public importance of the questions raised." It's a helluva stretch (especially since Hamdan v. Rumsfeld focused on the fact that Hamdan was not part of the US military in ruling not to abstain), but the point is that in five minutes of Googling, I went from being completely ignorant about judicial abstention in military affairs, to being able to make a more relevant argument against it than Ms. Taitz was capable of mounting. (My argument would surely have failed, but at least it would have addressed the judge's ruling)
Thereby I conclude that Taitz is not just crazy and filled with hate, she is also very very stupid. It makes me scared for the patients of her dental practice...
Posted by: James Sweet | October 14, 2009 1:07 PM
D. C. Sessions: Judge Land has people with guns (Federal Marshals) to enforce his decisions in what is still the ultimate power game.
The final foundation of the rule of law is the ability of sovereign powers to resort to force: Ultima Ratio Regum.
D. C. Sessions: Whether we like it or not, Chairman Mao was correct in one thing: all power does flow from the barrel of a gun.
From the application of force is closer. While guns are sufficient, more subtle weapons than guns also suffice. The essence of power is the ability to express a choice that alters in your favor the probability expression of something else's choices. Chosing to shoot and kill you (thus, decreasing the likelihood of your raising a fuss and increasing the likelihood of you lying about and decomposing) lacks finesse, but is generally effective at reducing your nuisance level. Threatening to do so is also often effective, but less certain -- especially if the threatened person is of particularly high or low intelligence. Depriving someone of property or liberty have similar increases in subtlety (and potential decrease in effectiveness) for altering someone else's choices. Verbal and non-verbal persuasion continue the spectrum. After more subtle approaches fail, even civilized humans tend to resort to less subtle means.
I eagerly await further developments in Ms. Taitz's education.
Posted by: abb3w | October 14, 2009 1:09 PM
Clay Land is the judge here, and as I said on another blog comment: Clay Land rules.
(I only realized the pun after the fact).
Posted by: cm | October 14, 2009 1:12 PM
Lee @#20 beats me to it.
Ed, any chance of getting judge Jones and Judge land together on Declaring independence? Along with some adult beverages?
Posted by: Pieter B | October 14, 2009 1:24 PM
Clay Land. In the south we just call it red. As in communist. Also crypto-Muslim, socialist fascist carpetbaggers. Further, Judge Land is of negro descent and not even eligible to serve in any capacity within the United States government. He was not properly vetted by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, nor was he properly confirmed by the Senate in dereliction of that body's Constitutionally-mandated duty to advise the President and consent to his appointments. Also, as a non-Christian he is barred from service by Article VI. We have another Constitutional Crisis!
This order is not just Unconstitutional and ullegal, but immoral and contradictory to the Will of God Himself. The so-called decisions of this so-called Court are therefore null and void.
Posted by: kkkehrsam | October 14, 2009 1:32 PM
Yeah, you have to do the crazy talk, but there's money in this I'm sure.
Posted by: kehrsam | October 14, 2009 1:34 PM
No necessary. As any fan of News Radio could tell you, all she has to do is say "Tubalcain" to the judge and the whole thing will be forgotten.
Posted by: Savagemutt | October 14, 2009 1:35 PM
Regarding the "all power flows from the barrel of a gun", Steven Pinker points out in The Blank Slate that this is close to true, but not actually quite correct. For societies above a particular (very small) threshold, it becomes quite impossible to have a gun pointed at each and every citizen.
So, as abb3w touches on, the political power actually grows out of "a regime's ability to command the fear of enough people at the same time." This is a subtle but important difference.
http://books.google.com/books?id=7rJ5gI1LbXoC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=pinker+blank+slate+mao+barrel+of+a+gun&source=bl&ots=cxR3JI1QyZ&sig=Geo_y8oiPbTYy3_CNEKP6vC6u4E&hl=en&ei=jg_WSradApWrlAfU5fScCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CA4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Posted by: James Sweet | October 14, 2009 1:52 PM
Was $20K fine enough? Maybe when Taitz becomes a real lawyer she will appreciate what just happened. I wonder if she is a mail order bride, just like her law degree? She is perfect for a reporter job with "Fake News".
Posted by: Paul | October 14, 2009 1:52 PM
Seriously, people, this lady needs a sanity hearing.
Posted by: Paul Lundgren | October 14, 2009 2:57 PM
kehrsam:
Have you considered advertising as a legal expert on cases involving Lizardpeople born on distant planets and then wormholed to Kenya--since the Hawaii wormhole was still charging "seasonal" rates--and THEN MurKKKa's 44th president?
I know that you have the chops for it, but I'm not sure you can be that EEEEEEEEEEEEvul.
Posted by: democommie | October 14, 2009 3:11 PM
My favorite part was:
Posted by: Hayate Yagami | October 14, 2009 3:19 PM
And here's a bit from her appearance on CNN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sS6yOaHa2VY
The first couple lines:
I can only imagine what's going to happen a month from now when she doesn't pay, and has been slandering the judge the whole time.
Posted by: Hayate Yagami | October 14, 2009 3:30 PM
For a couple of years in the 70s the phrase "There seems to be a little confusion here Orly" was a meme in Canada, appearing on T shirts and being spoken when some one said something dumb. It originated from a soft drink commercial.
In the 70s Coke retaliated to Pepsi's "Take the Pepsi Challenge" campaign with a taste test pitting Pepsi against Fresca (a lemon lime soft drink made by Coke). This resulted in a commercial featuring a guy named Orly Dunstan who said he preferred the Pepsi. Orly was then informed that the glass he preferred was actually Fresca and the announcer said "There seems to a little confusion here Orly".
I think the meme could be resurrected.
Posted by: Militant Agnostic | October 14, 2009 3:54 PM
Let me check my pockets and see if I can find some sympathy for Orly...
No, sorry...all I have is lint, a Canadian penny, and an old Bazooka Joe comic strip.
Posted by: CHV | October 14, 2009 4:23 PM
This reminds me more of that painful scene in "The Breakfast Club" where John Bender won't shut up but instead keeps asking Dick Vernon for more days of detention. Except Taitz isn't nearly as cool as Bender.
Posted by: Robert Faber | October 14, 2009 4:26 PM
Fresca, of course, is grapefruit flavored, not lemon-lime. It still exists, but only in cans for some reason. Now that they've scrapped the saccharin, it's pretty tasty.
Posted by: kehrsam | October 14, 2009 5:01 PM
LMFAO. Orly Taitz is the gift that keeps on giving. I eagerly await her disbarment.
Although I really wonder how her family *survived* the Soviet Union. Surely the Ezhovshchina picked off the people with such limited life skills?
Posted by: S | October 14, 2009 5:06 PM
Look, I'm reasonable. I personally don't believe that the president is not human. But I have to wonder why he doesn't just release the DNA test and put an end to all the controversy? What's he trying to hide?
I heard somewhere that he's spent millions of dollars trying to keep his DNA hidden.
Posted by: Taz | October 14, 2009 5:20 PM
Taz - I agree with the need for a DNA test - he needs to prove he is not a shape shifting Lizard.
Kersham - I stand corrected - all I remember is Fresca was sour as hell.
Posted by: Militant Agnostic | October 14, 2009 5:32 PM
I don't think they should just double the fine each round...they should square it. So her next loss should cost her 400 mil.
Posted by: Ed T | October 14, 2009 6:06 PM
Taz @ 42 stated:
Taitz has a witness that was at the rape of a young girl in 1990. That witness claims it was not Glenn Beck who raped the young girl, but that he merely held her down while Mr. Obama did the dirty deed. That's why Mr. Obama is reluctant to submit his DNA for testing. I hear Michelle Obama video-taped the whole incident. [removes tinfoil hat]
Posted by: Michael Heath | October 14, 2009 6:22 PM
Poor little Birthers, no court cases won, no one with a brain and common sense take you seriously, except maybe “Fake News”, where unfounded rumors and innuendo reign supreme , unlike a our US courts of law, where you need to present facts, not half baked lies. Birthers hate and can’t debate.
Posted by: Paul | October 14, 2009 8:00 PM
Ed T #44 gets my vote for comment thread winner on this one.
Posted by: cm | October 14, 2009 8:38 PM
kehrsam; that was so spot-on it's frightening.
Posted by: Shay | October 14, 2009 9:32 PM
Come on people she is a lawyer, dentist, realtor, black belt, I must say she is a JACK of all trades master of none.
Posted by: Paul | October 14, 2009 11:28 PM
Actually, Paul (#49), I believe she is a performance artist. This whole "crazy act" -- even the accent -- is part of an on-going public performance. We're all being taken in, those of us laughing at her, and especially her true-believing supporters.
Some day she will suddenly disappear and her followers will -- unknowingly -- carry on the performance.
It's got to be an act. Nobody could be that whacko. Nobody.
Posted by: Gerry L | October 15, 2009 1:07 AM
Orly - Girl, it's time you got something else to keep your pin-head warm; Barney Rubble wants his merkin back. - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | October 15, 2009 1:08 AM
Orly Taitz is the pseudonym for Sarah Palin, now that she's no longer constrained by being governor of Alaska. You're right, Gerry, it's an act.
Posted by: Ed Darrell | October 15, 2009 2:12 AM
Orly responds!!!
"In regards to Judge Clay Land, his outrageous decision to sanction me $20,000 for repeatedly bringing eligibility issue, shows how far this regime will go to harass and intimidate attorneys who dare to question Obama’s legitimacy.
Anybody with half a brain in his head understands that if judge Land really believed that my law suits were frivolous, the easiest way to prove it, would be to order discovery. If Obama is legitimate, he would’ve shown proof of legitimacy. The fact that this judge decided to try to intimidate me with $20,000 of sanctions instead of ordering Obama to spend $10 on a copy of his hospital birth certificate and a hospital birthing file, shows how corrupt this regime is, how many in federal judiciary are aiding and abetting this massive fraud perpetrated on each and every member of US military and each and every citizen of this country. That is a sign of a dictatorial regime, of tyranny."
-orlytaitzesq.com
Posted by: Lee | October 15, 2009 2:19 AM
From a practical perspective, that would be a very, very bad idea. She'd just love to paint herself as a martyr, locked away and silenced by agents of the "Obama Machine". This would get her more free publicity, and increase her popularity in the wingnut community.
Posted by: Walton | October 15, 2009 4:34 AM
@38 CHV - Ooh, is it the one where they're dining at a restaurant on the Moon that has "no atmosphere"? That one always cracks me up. :)
Posted by: Imrryr | October 15, 2009 7:05 AM
Posted by: James Hanley | October 15, 2009 7:05 AM
At least Jim Garrison and "Doc" Holliday were actually a lawyer and a dentist, respectively.
Posted by: democommie | October 15, 2009 8:26 AM
I used to look forward to seeing how WND reports on these things. Believing that no doubt they'd say that Obama somehow ordered this to silence those who would speak against him.
In more recent weeks though, even WND seems to have reduced it's coverage of the birthers. There was a time when I could visit them confident the top ten stories would all be birther related. Either they have grown bored, or realised their plan has failed and moved on to another.
WND was the greatest proponant of the birther conspiracy theory. If they have truely abandoned it, then it may soon die entirely. The believers will carry on believing, of course - but it'd mean no more billboards, minimal media coverage, and a slow fade into obscurity.
They are currently promoting a different conspiricy theory, that a team of elite islamic jihadist spies has infiltrated the US government under the direction of CAIR and plans to destroy the country from the inside.
Posted by: Suricou Raven | October 15, 2009 10:38 AM
Ohh, here it is, half way down:
"Eligibility attorney mocked, fined $20,000
Judge: Perhaps 'eccentric citizen' convinced president 'alien from Mars'"
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=112788
It's more or less what you'd expect: "Obama spends millions to silence this case, we have proof he was born in Kenya, send us money."
Posted by: Suricou Raven | October 15, 2009 10:47 AM
Look out, RI readers:
PRLog (Press Release) – Oct 15, 2009 – Dr. Orly Taitz will be giving a radio interview on Providence radio station WARL AM 1320 with talk host Charlie Profit on the Charlie Profit Report Thursday October 15, 2009 at 3:30 PM. Among topics that will be discussed: President Obama's citizenship and whether he meets the minimum requirements to be President; a newly found Kenyan newspaper article from 2004 which states Obama is Kenyan born; and the document Dr. Taitz claims is a notarized copy of of Barry Soetero's (President Obama's birth name) Kenyan Birth Certificate.
Posted by: Scaryduck | October 15, 2009 1:58 PM
If I understand my Obama history correctly, wasn't Soeoro the surname of the man that Ann Dunham married four years AFTER Obama was born? Why, then, would Obama's birth surname be that of his mother's future husband, especially if he was born in Kenya, presumably in the presence of Barack Obama Sr.'s family?
These people can't even keep their own stories straight!
Posted by: mds | October 15, 2009 2:12 PM
No, the birth name was Obama. "Soetero" was his mother's second husband, who is alleged to have adopted the baby. This adoption somehow rendered the boy incapable of growing up to be President.
Posted by: kehrsam | October 15, 2009 2:18 PM
You know, I'm almost starting to feel sorry for her.
I definitely pity her kids.
Posted by: Chilidog | October 15, 2009 3:11 PM
In related news, the U.S. Supreme Court just declared that based on the Chicago Daily News, Dewey really did defeat Truman.
Posted by: Chilidog | October 15, 2009 3:15 PM
So? That doesn't mean Soetoro wasn't his birth name. If Ann Dunham had the prescience to put false birth notices in Hawaiian newspapers on the off chance that her son would become president decades later, what makes you think she wouldn't also be able to see into the future to know the surname of her second husband? The latter is child's play compared to the former!
Posted by: James Sweet | October 15, 2009 4:03 PM
Do you even have to ask?
Say it with me now: CONSPIRACY!!
Posted by: DaveL | October 15, 2009 4:22 PM