UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE NINTH CIRCUITWILEY S. DRAKE, et al.,)NO. 09-56827)Plaintiffs/Appellants,)D.C. No. 8:09-CV-00082-DOC)Central District of Californiav.)Santa Ana)BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, et al.,))Defendants/Appellees. ))PAMELA BARNETT, Captain, et al.,)NO. 10-55084)Plaintiffs/Appellants,)D.C. No. 8:09-CV-00082-DOC)Central District of Californiav.)Santa Ana)BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, et al.,))Defendants/Appellees. )
APPELLEES’ ANSWERING BRIEF
APPEAL FROM THETHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THECENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SANTA ANASA CV 09-00082 DOCANDRÉ BIROTTE JR.United States AttorneyLEON W. WEIDMANAssistant United States AttorneyChief, Civil DivisionROGER E. WESTAssistant United States AttorneyFirst Assistant Chief, Civil DivisionDAVID A. DeJUTEAssistant United States AttorneyRoom 7516 Federal Building300 North Los Angeles StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012Telephone: (213) 894-2461/2574Facsimile: (213) 894-7819Attorneys for Defendants/Appellees
Case: 10-55084 10/13/2010 Page: 1 of 34 ID: 7507426 DktEntry: 26-1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.COUNTER-STATEMENT OF ISSUES ON APPEAL................1II.STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION...............................1III.STATEMENT OF THE CASE...................................2A.NATURE OF THE CASE.................................2B.COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS BELOW AND STATEMENTOF FACTS .............................................3IV.STANDARD OF REVIEW......................................4V.SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT...................................4VI.ARGUMENT................................................5A.THE DISTRICT COURT CORRECTLY FOUND THAT ITLACKED SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THEACTION...............................................51.Appellants Lacked Standing To Bring The Action.........5a.Appellants Failed To Show The Required Concrete,Traceable Injury-In-Fact To Vest Them WithStanding.....................................6(1.)Active Military Personnel..................6(2.)Former Military Personnel..................8(3.)State Representatives......................9(4.)Federal Taxpayers.......................10
i
Case: 10-55084 10/13/2010 Page: 2 of 34 ID: 7507426 DktEntry: 26-1
(5.)Alleged Relatives of President Obama.......11(6.)Political Candidates......................12b.Appellants Failed to Satisfy the RedressabilityRequirement for Standing......................14c.The District Court Correctly Found That This CasePresents Non-Justiciable Political Questions........17B.THE DISTRICT COURT CORRECTLY DISMISSEDAPPELLANTS’ QUO WARRANTO CLAIMS...............21C.THE DISTRICT COURT CORRECTLY DISMISSEDAPPELLANTS’ FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACTCLAIMS ..............................................23D.THE CLAIMS AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS OTHER THANPRESIDENT OBAMA WERE PROPERLY DISMISSED.......24E.THE DISTRICT COURT CORRECTLY DENIED APPELLANTS’REQUESTS TO ENTER DEFAULT OF DEFENDANTS.......24F.THE BARNETT APPELLANTS’ REMAINING CONTENTIONSARE WITHOUT MERIT.................................251.Appellants’ Attacks Upon The District CourtAre Frivolous.....................................252.The District Court Did Not Err In Denying Appellants’Request To File A Second Amended Complaint..........26VII.CONCLUSION..............................................27VIII.STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES...........................28
ii
Case: 10-55084 10/13/2010 Page: 3 of 34 ID: 7507426 DktEntry: 26-1
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
BARNETT|KEYES v OBAMA (APPEAL - 9th CIRCUIT) - 26 - Submitted (ECF) Answering brief for review. - TransportRoom.26.0
10/13/2010 26 Submitted (ECF) Answering brief for review. Submitted by Appellees Joseph R. Biden, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Robert M. Gates, Barack Hussein Obama and Michelle L.R. Obama in 09-56827. Date of service: 10/13/2010. [7507426] [09-56827, 10-55084] (DAD)
1.4K
Reads
7
Readcasts
97
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
