Butterfly Bilderberg and others have demolished Vogt’s attempt to have various Supreme Court justices recuse themselves and to have all actions by President Obama declared null and void.
The attempt to have Obama appointees recuse themselves has already been rejected in several cases, Hollister v Soetoro and Kerchner v Obama. As to the de facto officer doctrine:
Note to “HistorianDude” who is too much of a coward to use his real name. You are wrong regarding “de facto doctrine” only applies to the actions of a government body not an individual as was stated in the filing. Obama has not proven citizenship therefore he was NEVER QUALIFIED to hold any office. Your obot lies are not working any longer. Too many people know the truth. By the way the reference from Frank Arduini is full of lies and misinterpretations and is easy to prove wrong.so no one with an IQ over 80 beleavesit once they read my affidavite. Its over for you.
But more importantly tell us why YOU support the MARXIST in the White House? When did you decide communism/socialism is a better form of government to “live” under.
Vogt is apparently unfamiliar with the meaning of the term de facto officer as it applies to individuals…
The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person’s appointment or election to office is deficient. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886). “The de facto doctrine springs from the fear of the chaos that would result from multiple and repetitious suits challenging every action taken by every official whose claim to office could be open to question, and seeks to protect the public by insuring the orderly functioning of the government despite technical defects in title to office.” 63A Am. Jur. 2d, Public Officers and Employees § 578, pp. 1080-1081 (1984) (footnote omitted).”
Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177, 180 (1995) (a 9-0 decision)