Yes Florida there is a sanity clause, Judges may be removed from office by impeachment, Judicial qualifications commission, Judge Kevin Carroll removal, Leon County circuit court

Yes Florida there is a sanity clause, Judges may be removed from office by impeachment, Judicial qualifications commission, Judge Kevin Carroll removal, Leon County circuit court

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why do state election officials continue to ignore the US Constitution, federal election code and their own state election statutes?”…Citizen Wells

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

Judge Kevin Carroll, a Leon County Florida Circuit Court Judge, recently dismissed an Obama eligibility case. Judge Carroll made reference to a fictional ruling on Santa Clause in the movie “Miracle on 34th Street.”

I have a Sanity Clause ruling for Judge Carroll.

Removal from office.

In Florida there are 2 ways to remove a judge:

1. On the recommendation of the judicial qualifications commission, the supreme court may discipline, retire, or remove a judge.

2. Judges may be impeached by a two-thirds vote of the house of representatives and convicted by a two-thirds vote of the senate.

From WND December 22, 2012.

“ELIGIBILITY JUDGE QUOTES FAMOUS SANTA CASE
Cites paraphrased decision in ‘Miracle on 34th Street’ in Florida Democrat’s challenge”

“A real-life Florida judge has paraphrased a statement from the fictional Judge Henry X. Harper in “Miracle on 34th Street” to justify his sudden decision to dismiss a challenge under state law to Barack Obama’s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

The ruling from Kevin Carroll of the Florida circuit court for Leon County dismissed the case brought on behalf of Democratic voter Michael C. Voeltz, who raised the issue of Obama’s qualifications under a state law that allows voters to challenge candidates’ eligibility.

Carroll, who had given the plaintiffs until Dec. 23 to respond to Obama’s motion to dismiss the case, changed his mind and abruptly Thursday ordered the case dismissed.

He explained that the fact the government says Obama is qualified to be president is more than enough for him.

“This court notes that President Obama lives in the White House. He flies on Air Force One. He has appeared before Congress, delivered State of the Union addresses and meets with congressional leaders on a regular basis. He has appointed countless ambassadors to represent the interests of the United States throughout the world,” Carroll wrote.

“As this matter has come before the court at this time of the year it seems only appropriate to paraphrase the ruling rendered by the fictional Judge Henry X. Harper from New York in open court in the classic holiday film ‘Miracle on 34th St.’ ‘Since the United States Government declares this man to be president, this court will not dispute it. Case dismissed.’”

It was the second time in eligibility cases that a judge appears to have abandoned legal fundamentals and simply ruled for Obama on no particular basis.

Several years ago it was Judge James Robertson in Washington who dismissed a case because, he wrote, “The issue of the president’s citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year campaign for the presidency.”

Carroll’s ruling also did not address the fact that in the movie, the judge was determining that a resident of a nursing home hired to play Santa Claus at a Macy’s store was, in fact, Santa Claus. His ‘proof” was a pile of mail addressed to Santa Claus that the post office delivered to him, confirming his identity.

Attorney Larry Klayman, representing Voeltz in the case, immediately responded with a motion for rehearing, contending that the judge “prematurely and precipitously” dismissed the complaint without a hearing as outlined under state law.

“This act also flies in the face of this court’s own order of Dec. 13, 2012, which was law of the case,” noted Klayman, founder of FreedomWatchUSA.

“This court had a statutory duty under the Florida Election laws, the Florida and U.S. Constitutions, and 3 U.S.C. Section 5, to adjudicate defendant Obama’s eligibility and his alleged fraudulent acts expeditiously, timely, and before the electors met on Dec. 17, 2012, and before the Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, 2013, Klayman explained. “Thus, this court also violated these law is dismissing the complaint summarily.”

Klayman suggested to the court its order “at a minimum creates an appearance that it simply jettisoned this case not only on the extrajudicial and non-legal premise that President Obama was president during the prior four year term, and has already performed many ‘presidential’ acts but also because this court did not want to be ‘inconvenienced’ by holding an evidentiary hearing.”

Klayman also questioned Carroll’s “off-the-cuff” remarks about a friend being appointed to a federal post by Obama as inappropriate.

He said the remarks about fictional judge Henry X. Harper in “Miracle on 34th St.” also were “inappropriate” and showed “a mindset simply to rid the court of this case.”

“This court seems to want to sidestep having to reach these serious and important matters before it,” Klayman said.

Klayman is seeking a rehearing and an evidentiary hearing in the dispute. He’s also seeking a temporary restraining order to halt the delivery of the Florida electoral votes to Obama until the court case is resolved.

He has submitted evidence by way of a sworn statement from Investigator Mike Zullo of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse in Arizona that there probably were two crimes committed in the creation and display of Obama’s long-form birth certificate, which was released by the White House and posted online.

Zullo’s testimony is that forgery was used to create the document, and fraud was used in “presenting to the residents of Maricopa County and to the American public at large a forgery the White House represents as “proof positive” of President Obama’s” birth documentation.

Arpaio’s affidavit also was presented to the judge.

The sheriff said: “My investigators and I believe that President Obama’s long-form birth certificate is a computer-generated document, was manufactured electronically, and that it did not originate in a paper format, as claimed by the White House. … There is probable cause that the document is a forgery.”

Klayman has argued that Obama “has never established his eligibility for the presidency of the United States … the only evidence of defendant Obama’s alleged birth within the United States has come in the form of a belatedly filed electronic version of a claimed long-form birth certificate posted on the Internet.”

He told the judge that the evidence suggests, however, the document is fraudulent.

The case claims that should the judge not address the facts, the plaintiff “can never be made whole again.”

“If defendant Obama is found to be ineligible, which is likely to happen since there is no evidence … Obama was born in the United States to U.S. citizen parents, the plaintiff’s vote in the 2012 presidential election will be nullified.”

He suggested state law calls for an expedited hearing in such cases.

Carroll, however, said the state of Florida does not have jurisdiction to “determine the issue of qualification for the office of president of the United States, particularly at this late date in the process.”

His comments came after another challenge filed by Voeltz earlier this year was dismissed because the judge ruled it couldn’t be addressed until after the election.”

“Klayman said he also will be trying to go directly to the Florida Supreme Court if Carroll does not reconsider.

“It’s truly ‘remarkable’ and an affront to the rule of law and all our founding fathers and colonial America fought and risked and gave their lives for. This type of conduct by the establishment, which thinks it can do as it pleases without consequences, is why we have entered into a revolutionary state 236 years after we declared independence from the king. They will soon from We the People learn that there are consequences,” he said.

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/eligibility-judge-quotes-famous-santa-case/#HSid5ipo2b70BbeE.99

Judge Kevin Carroll is either biased, incompetent or insane or some combination and should be removed.

Florida’s Sanity Clause.

Florida House of Representatives.

“The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, members of the Cabinet, justices of the Supreme Court, and judges may be removed from office by impeachment. The House of Representatives has the sole power to impeach. It may do so by a two-thirds vote of the members voting. The Senate tries all impeachments, with the Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court presiding. A two-thirds vote of the Senate is required to convict. If convicted, the officer is removed from office.”

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/glossary/glossary.aspx?Filter=I

Florida 2011 Court Reform.

“What the Joint Resolution Does:

House Joint Resolution 7111 proposes a Constitutional Amendment to
address reforms to Florida’s court system. The Joint Resolution passed the
Florida House with a vote of 80-38 on May 3, 2011, and later passed the
Senate with a vote of 24-11 on May 5, 2011. Among other things, the Joint
Resolution:”

“As the body responsible for judicial impeachment proceedings,
grants the Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, at his
or her request, access to the complaint files of the Judicial
Qualifications Commission at any time. The bill requires the
complaint files be kept confidential until the information is used in
the pursuit of impeachment.”

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Handlers/LeagisDocumentRetriever.ashx?Leaf=housecontent/opi/Lists/Announcements/Attachments/35/OPI%20Pulse%20-%20Court%20Reform%205-23-11.pdf&Area=House

Florida Code of Judicial Conduct.

“CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
For the State of Florida
Online Version

Reports of misconduct by judges must be made to the Judicial Qualifications Commission at (850) 488-1581.

Print the Entire Code of Judicial Conduct in PDF.

The opinions of the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee
are available on the Sixth Judicial Circuit Website.
Visit the web site to search the opinions.

Preamble

Definitions

Canon 1. A Judge Shall Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary

Canon 2. A Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all of the Judge’s Activities

Canon 3. A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently

Canon 4. A Judge Is Encouraged to Engage in Activities to Improve the Law, the Legal System, and the Administration of Justice

Canon 5. A Judge Shall Regulate Extrajudicial Activities to Minimize the Risk of Conflict With Judicial Duties

Canon 6. Fiscal Matters of a Judge Shall be Conducted in a Manner That Does Not Give the Appearance of Influence or Impropriety; etc.

Canon 7. A Judge or Candidate for Judicial Office Shall Refrain From Inappropriate Political Activity”

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/ethics/index.shtml

Mission of the Florida Judicial Branch.

“The mission of the judicial branch is to protect rights and liberties, uphold and interpret the law, and provide for the peaceful resolution of disputes.

Vision of the Florida Judicial Branch
Justice in Florida will be accessible, fair, effective, responsive, and accountable.

To be accessible, the Florida justice system will be convenient, understandable, timely, and affordable to everyone.

To be fair, it will respect the dignity of every person, regardless of race, class, gender or other characteristic, apply the law appropriately to the circumstances of individual cases, and include judges and court staff that reflect the community’s diversity.

To be effective, it will uphold the law and apply rules and procedures consistently and in a timely manner, resolve cases with finality, and provide enforceable decisions.

To be responsive, it will anticipate and respond to the needs of all members of society, and provide a variety of dispute resolution methods.

To be accountable, the Florida justice system will use public resources efficiently, and in a way that the public can understand.”

http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/mi_vi/index.shtml

Procedures for filing a complaint.

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/jqc.shtml

Judge Kevin Carroll Ruling.

http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/12/12CA3857.pdf