I dunno. Given what I'd read about him in a booked called "Threat Matrix" about how the FBI deals with terrorism, I'm surprised he hasn't kicked her to the curb already, and it makes me extremely doubtful that he ever will. There's a section of the book that talks about Lamberth during his tenure as the chief judge of the FISA court. From a post I made several months ago (that quotes from the book):



Based on that, he doesn't sound like the kind of judge who pussyfoots around when he wants to send a message nor one that puts up with any tomfoolery for ANY length of time. That he's let Orly get away with as much as she already has just strikes me as flat-out weird, and THAT makes me pretty skeptical - especially since it seems from the above like he maybe has a bit of an anti-government/justice department bias. But that's just me, YMMV, eh?

He did nothing to the Super American Fake Grand Jury people, after their second filing (really just a nastygram), which was about the most insolent thing you can imagine.

I don't think he'll do anything to O'rly except deny her MtR. Prove me wrong, Your Honor.

There is a difference between Orly Taitz, Esquire, proffering fraudulently obtained "evidence" to a Federal court and a collection of pro se lunatics masquerading as a "Grand Jury".

Lunatics, even appearing en masse, are usually dispatched quite easily on a legal basis. There is really no need to go another step further and sanction them for their lunacy. The dismissal order is typically a sufficient response.

If all lunatics were sanctioned for their frivolity upon presentation of a valid motion to dismiss, there would dozens of such orders a week. While the system could use the influx of cash, the court would also develop a reputation for denying access to justice and unfairly penalizing laymen for their ignorance of the law.

On the whole, the courts protect the rights of lunatics to attempt to state a claim.

If the lunatic also happens to be a licensed attorney, it's a different game. And if that attorney shows no hesitation in encouraging others to break the law in pursuit of the "claim", courts are more likely to take notice.

Judge Lamberth did take notice. He has warned Taitz with the inclusion of footnote 4 in his dismissal order. She's barging ahead with more illegally obtained "evidence". Will Judge Lamberth take more direct action? Maybe, maybe not.

But comparing Orly's behavior with the "Grand Jury" is apples and oranges to me.

Raicha, as usual, makes some good points. I think that Judge Lamberth is very cognizant of the notion of keeping the courts open to grievances (as, really, were Judge Carter and Judge Land). The latter two Judges, however, were not going to let Orly's bullshit continue for very long. Judge Lamberth, on the other hand, has been excessively patient with her. I certainly hope that those of you who think that he's been laying the foundation for some heavy duty ramifications are correct, but I'm not holding my breath.

It's hard to think O'rly is any less a lunatic than the AGJ folks, even with a law license. In fact, ol' Offshore Jobs Bob had the brains to get out. His website is dead and he's an ex-birfer.

Raicha is right that it's not a parallel comparison. But I wasn't impressed by "today isn't her lucky day". He hasn't shown any toughness with regard to O'rly. I'd love to see her get hammered. She deserves to be hammered. I spent many hours writing that document to Nemeroff with all the good reasons she should be hammered. I just don't believe that Judge Lamberth will do it. I hope I'm wrong, but that's my best guess.

As exasperating as it must be for us, who obsessively follow the antics of this lunatic, remember that to Judge Lamberth, she is a person of zero significance. The cases Lamberth decides involve national security, claims in the billions of dollars, cases of vital public interest like the recent Nixon materials case and things like that. Every minute spent drafting legal reasoning to support sanctioning an Orly is time away from something more important.

I personally think in the case of Orly that it would be more inefficient to sanction Orly because she has made it clear she will otherwise just be back time and time again with even more illegal conduct. Perhaps Lamberth will come around to this viewpoint.

That's why she should be sanctioned and declared a vexatious litigant. A real sanction. I am thinking over $200,000 this time. She has the money. There's nothing in the rules, that I am aware of, that says he cannot do both. Somebody needs to declare her a vexatious litigant. It will get the ball rolling at least.

There isn't, as such, a formal declaration of vexatious litigant status in federal court. The closest you get is something like Andy Martin got, and that takes forever. Orly will have to work at it for some time. I do think her current conduct deserves a hefty sanction and disbarment. Identity theft, wire fraud and mail fraud and conspiracy are crimes of moral turpitude.

AND she admitted to the court all of the above “under penalty of perjury” ferchrissakes!

What else does she have to do, put a paper bag full of batshit on his desk and light it on fire?

An indictment on any charges related to her lawsuits will also stir up the remaining birthers, make her a martyr for the cause in the eyes of many, and give her the attention and fame that she so desperately seeks. As nice as it would be to see her take the felony hit that she's earned, it's not exactly a clearcut win.

Repeated censure and sanction from federal courts, followed by disbarment after the 2012 election, when the entire issue will sink farther into obscurity no matter what the outcome, would be the ideal as far as I'm concerned. She will still get most of what she deserves, with the big blow coming at a time when nobody is really paying attention to her anymore.

It is certainly within Lamberth's power to require her to clear any new lawsuits through him and/or his successors in his District. While states have done this via statute, I know of nothing that prevents any federal judge from imposing filing clearance for abusive litigants. Unless I am missing something.

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=25490#comments




In the same thread, a vote of confidence:

Poor Thayne, sits in Greeley with nothing else to do except make ill-informed comments on Orly's blog. Sad, really.

I agree. But his advice that Orly not represent herself is some of the most rational commentary I've seen from this Orbot..

Aah! That's what's missing! She didn't light it on fire!!

I fully agree with you that it is within Lamberth's power to do that in his District. I would go further, actually, and I believe he has the power to issue an injunction preventing her further abuse of any of the federal courts. That is exactly what was done to Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, who currently calls himself Andy Martin. The federal permanent injunction against him even places restrictions on how he may initiate actions in state courts or regulatory agencies impacting people's credit ratings. It is a truly extraordinary injunction, addressing truly extraordinary conduct. See In re Martin-Trigona, 592 F. Supp. 1566 (D. Conn. 1984).

My point wasn't disagreeing with you that Lamberth has these powers, but just that there is no formal authorization for a specific process dealing with vexatious litigants. The ability of the federal courts to control their dockets, however, is very expansive. However, Article III judges generally exercise a high degree of restraint in how they exercise these powers, reserving extraordinary injunctive relief to the truly extraordinary case. Orly is one of a dozen or so idiots perpetrating mostly ineffectual bullshit that costs comparatively little to its targets. Martin-Trigona, by contrast, was an extremely devious and competent litigant (at least as far as exploiting the system to harm his adversaries), who caused an extraordinary amount of damage to the system.

Even in state courts, it requires Martin to append documents explaining his litigation history, specifically, In re Martin-Trigona, 573 F. Supp. 1245 (D. Conn. 1983), and In re Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d 1254 (2d Cir. 1984). The document explicitly preserves his right to defend himself in criminal prosecutions and has other provisions to avoid violating the extremely broad set of rights pro se litigants have in pursuing legal actions.

To do something similar to Orly would require a substantial amount of legal effort and a good deal of legal research to avoid running afoul of fundamental rights. If you Shepardize any of the cites I just made here, you will be amazed at the length of the prior and subsequent history, the number of remands and the sheer volume of content associated with this one litigant.

Orly hasn't come within a statute mile of this level of conduct. I am in full agreement with you that she should not be allowed to get there. However, the actual damage she's caused is pretty small, compared to some litigants. I agree with you that we are too lenient with openly malicious abusers of the legal system. However, as much as I despise Orly, I would prefer that to wholesale denials of plaintiffs' rights in the wake of decisions like Iqbal and Twombly.

I'd love to see Lamberth sanction Orly. I hope he does. She has basically sworn under oath that she committed federal felonies and conspired to do so. Andy Martin would never have been so stupid.

Trigona, or whatever he calls himself these days, wasn't a lawyer. Taitz is. So, in her case, less should be sufficient. The bar license say she should know better (though we know that in her case it's meaningless).

Too bad the CA Bar isn't as effective as the IL Bar.

So cruel

Martin-Trigona, currently known as Andy Martin, was so horrifically bad a frivolous litigant that the Illinois Bar had good cause to exclude him from membership before he even became a lawyer.

His pro se lunacy after that, combined with the fact he was actually a law school graduate, guaranteed his eventual declaration as a vexatious litigant. Well, at least after he filed *250* bullshit lawsuits, none of which had the slightest merit, and most of those lawsuits had dockets that would put the Liberi shit to shame.

Taitz has yet to file papers in a lawsuit describing the judge presiding over the case as "a crooked, slimy Jew who has a history of lying and thieving common to members of his race." Andy Martin did that, and subsequently claimed the evil Jew judges had forged it into his case. Poor baby.

I'm just noting that as abjectly awful as Orly's practice is, it simply doesn't rise to the level where federal courts have issued sweeping injunctions against continued lunacy. My personal opinion is that they should, but my personal observation is that they don't.

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=25533#comments

Which is why Taitz continues to post letters of those who do write the judge, so that her followers may emulate what she condones, not do as she says.

She's transparent in her hypocrisy.

O RLY?:

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=25533#comments

You unleashed the flying monkeys Orly. You honestly now think that you can control them?