← The journal

September 16, 2009

Judicial Humor

A judge in Georgia has dismissed as frivolous the case of Captain Doctor Connie Rhodes, who asked to be excused duty in Iraq on the grounds that President Obama is not a U.S. citizen and lacked the authority to order her deployment.

Whew! The Republic is saved, yet again.

But what was really terrific was that the court’s finding made savage fun of the plaintiff and her claims for fourteen whole pages. It’s pretty wonderful reading.

As I can testify based on my time as a court reporter, judges taken as a class are not known for their comedic stylings; and it’s nothing but terrific when a judge, faced with a baseless and witless case, points out with vicious, logical irony just how baseless and witless it is.
I was once the subject of such a lawsuit. My former agent sued my then-agent, a quondam employee of the former agent, for poaching me (and sundry other young writers) from his agency and for stealing confidential information (to-wit: my phone number, otherwise available from the phone directory). The suit was for seven figures. (I was impressed by my former agent’s estimation of my earnings potential, or ten percent thereof.) Anyway, the plaintiff probably realized he was in trouble when the judge started ridiculing his case from the bench, during the course of the trial. That’s never a good sign.
The comedy in this case was so good that my then-agent photocopied the trial transcript and sent it round to his clients. I still have a copy of it somewhere, just in case I’m ever in need of a good laugh.
But in the meantime, here are some choice excerpts from Judge Land’s recent decision. (Sorry about the formatting problems, I can’t seem to fix them.)
The Court observes that the President defeated seven opponents in a grueling campaign for his party’s nomination that lasted more than eighteen months and cost those opponents well over $300 million. Then the President faced a formidable opponent in the general election who received $84 million to conduct his general election campaign against the President.
It would appear that ample opportunity existed for discovery of evidence that would support any contention that the President was not eligible for the office he sought. To press her “birther agenda,” Plaintiff’s counsel has filed the present action on behalf of Captain Rhodes.
Captain Rhodes entered the Army in March of 2005 and presently serves as a medical doctor.

The American taxpayers paid for her third and fourth years of medical school and financially supported her during her subsequent medical internship and residency program. In exchange for this valuable free medical education, Captain Rhodes agreed to serve two years in active service in the Army. She began that term of active service in July of 2008 and had no concerns about fulfilling her military obligation until she received orders notifying her that she would be deployed to Iraq in September of 2009.
Captain Rhodes does not seek a discharge from the Army; nor does she wish to be relieved entirely from her two year active service obligation. She has not previously made any official complaints regarding any orders or assignments that she has received, including orders that have been issued since President Obama became Commander in Chief. But she does not want to go to Iraq (or to any other destination where she may be in harm’s way, for that matter). Her “conscientious objections” to serving under the current Commander in Chief apparently can be accommodated as long as she is permitted to remain on American soil . . .
First, Plaintiff’s challenge to her deployment order is frivolous. She has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations and conjecture that President Obama is ineligible to serve as President of the United States. Instead, she uses her Complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the President is “an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.” (Compl. ¶ 21.) She continues with bare, conclusory allegations that the President is “an alien, possibly even an unnaturalized or even an unadmitted illegal alien . . . without so much as lawful residency in the United States.” ( Id. ¶ 26.) Then, implying that the President is either a wandering nomad or a prolific identity fraud crook, she alleges that the President ” might have used as many as 149 addresses and 39 social security numbers prior to assuming the office of President.” ( Id. ¶ 110 (emphasis added).) Acknowledging the existence of a document that shows the President was born in Hawaii, Plaintiff alleges that the document “cannot be verified as genuine, and should be presumed fraudulent.” ( Id. ¶ 113 (emphasis added).) In further support of her claim, Plaintiff relies upon “the general opinion in the rest of the world” that “Barack Hussein Obama has, in essence, slipped through the guardrails to become President.” ( Id. ¶ 128.) Moreover, as though the “general opinion in the rest of the world” were not enough, Plaintiff alleges in her Complaint that according to an “AOL poll 85% of Americans believe that Obama was not vetted, needs to be vetted and his vital records need to be produced.” ( Id. ¶ 154.) Finally, in a remarkable shifting of the traditional legal burden of proof, Plaintiff unashamedly alleges that Defendant has the burden to prove his “natural born” status. ( Id. ¶¶ 136-138, 148.) Thus, Plaintiff’s counsel, who champions herself as a defender of liberty and freedom, seeks to use the power of the judiciary to compel a citizen, albeit the President of the United States, to “prove his innocence” to “charges” that are based upon conjecture and speculation. Any middle school civics student would readily recognize the irony of abandoning fundamental principles upon which our Country was founded in order to purportedly “protect and preserve” those very principles . . .
Plaintiff has not sought to be excused from all military service. She does not seek a discharge from the Army. She does not even seek to avoid taking military orders under President Obama’s watch. She simply seeks to avoid being deployed to Iraq.

So much for the claims of Captain Doctor Rhodes. But on the other hand, she’s still a captain. In the army. And still a doctor.
If you were a serviceman and you were sent to Captain Doctor Rhodes, wouldn’t you— I dunno— tremble? Feign wellness? Run screaming from the room? Because, y’know, some of the hay has clearly escaped the loft here, and our servicemen deserve something better.

Reader responses

Comments

0 published

Be the first to respond.

Comments are moderated before publication. Please keep responses thoughtful and on topic.