I think it was muttonchopism.
I want to see Barry grow a set like that.
Posted on 09/02/2009 2:01:20 PM PDT by stan_sipple
I found some interesting facts about Chester Alan Arthur, who served as President in 1881-85, succeeding to the office after the assassination of James Garfield.
Arthur's father was an Irishman who moved to Canada. There, he eloped with an American woman from Vermont. Canada and Ireland were, at the time, under the government of the United Kingdom. The couple had several children, including Chester. The father did not become a naturalized American citizen until long after Chester's birth.
During the 1880 presidential campaign, Democrats hired Wall Street lawyer Arthur P. Hinman to investigate Arthur's background. Hinman released his findings to the Brooklyn Eagle newspaper during the campaign, and later wrote a book, How a British subject became president of the United States (1884).
Hinman contended that Arthur had been born in Canada, and was thus constitutionally ineligible to be Vice-President or President. (The Natural Born Citizen clause, however, applies only to who "shall be eligible to the Office of President." It does not, on its face, apply to the Vice Presidency. The clause of course reflects the original system of presidential elections, by which the electors cast two ballots, and whoever came in second became Vice President. The 12th Amendment changed that system, but did not revise the NBC clause accordingly.)
Arthur specifically denied the claim, and said that he had been born in Vermont. There was apparently no birth certificate, since such certificates were not used in many areas at the time that Arthur was born.
Later biographers have concluded that Arthur lied about his own age, and perhaps about various aspects of his father's life. The American people obviously made a political judgement, in electing Garfield-Arthur, that they either did not believe the charge of Canadian birth, or did not care about it.
Personally, I probably would have voted for the Democratic nominee, Winfield Scott Hancock, a man of impeccable integrity and great regard for constitutional rights. He lost the popular vote to Garfield by few than 10,000 votes. In 1881, Hancock became President of the National Rifle Association. (Following in the footsteps of Ulysses Grant, who served as NRA President after serving two terms as United States President.)
In any case, the existence of the Arthur controversy is an example of political opponents raising questions about whether a president was really a natural born citizen, and raising such questions for reasons other than racism.
Chester Arthur was ineligible because his father was a foreigner and not an American citizen at the time of Chesters birth.
The Obama question in this matter will not be settled until someone has ehe guts to actually do the hard work and prove one way or another his actual status as a citizen
The sole criterion on which Chester Arthur's citizenship and eligibility rests on where he was born, not where his father was born or whether his father was a citizen at the time.
From Wikipedia:
"In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person who:
* is born in the United States
* of parents who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
* whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
* whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject
becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the 14th amendment of the Constitution."
Notice that it doesn't say that the domicile and residence must be legal.
Leo Donofrio at http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com has THE ONLY definitive research on Chestur Arthur. Leo has confirmed beyond all doubt that Arthur lied about his citizenship and burned his records. (He was not a natural-born citizen.) Read Leo’s work. It’s fascinating. He has a great legal mind.
Yeah. You keep reading Wikipedia. They’re so honest.
It is a very good piece.
Btw, that does not define NBC.
You have absolutely, positively, no freaking idea, what you’re talking about. Wong Kim Ark has nothing to do with natural-born citizenship.
Go read up and come back for some discussion. Start here with Leo Donofrio’s ground-breaking research on Chester Arthur.
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/index.php?s=chester+arthur
“For the purposes of Minor and Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court didn’t need to reach the ‘natural born citizen’ issue as neither person was running for President, so they rightfully punted by limiting their holdings to the issue of whether each person was a ‘citizen’.”
was it racism to question Arthur’s citizenship?
Did you know that there are law students discussing Donofrio’s work and doing assignments on it? That’s amazing to me.
I think it was muttonchopism.
I want to see Barry grow a set like that.
Well, I'm fairly confident that Wikipedia isn't making it up. There really was a case called United States v. Wong Kim Ark No. 18, that was argued: March 5, 8, 1897 and Decided: on March 28, 1898. In that case, the majority held...
All person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
And, in the dissent, authored in part by Justice Fuller, Fuller disagrees with the majority opinion when he says...
In my judgment, the children of our citizens born abroad were always natural-born citizens from the standpoint of this Government. If not, and if the correct view is that they were aliens but collectively naturalized under the act of Congress which recognized them as natural-born, then those born since the Fourteenth Amendment are not citizens at all, [p715] unless they have become such by individual compliance with the general laws for the naturalization of aliens, because they are not naturalized "in the United States."
He goes onto to lament the practical implications of the majority opinion we he adds...
"Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution, I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that "natural-born citizen" applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances, and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race, were eligible to the Presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not."
Fuller ferociously disagrees with the majority's opinion, but he recognize and fears it's practical application with respect to Presidential eligibility.
Hey, but don't take my word for it, or Wiki's for that matter, here's the link to the Cornell Law School repository.
Fuller, in his dissenting opinion disagrees. You should read the case - all of it.
Hey, I resemble that remark!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESISTOR
Swear allegiance to the flag, whatever flag they offer;
Never hint at what you really feel.
Teach the children quietly for, someday, sons and daughters
Will rise up and fight while we stood still.
Der Elite Møøsënspåånkængrüppen ØberKømmändø (EMØØK)
Arthur was behind the Garfield assanation, and the father of Bea Arthur!
Arthur was behind the Garfield assanation, and the father of Bea Arthur!
That's amazing to me as well. May I ask where these law school matriculants are enrolled?
Then again, back in the day I remember spending a little time on a case called Dred Scott v Sandford. I don't remember any professor describing that as a case well-grounded in legal intent or outcome. Perhaps the same applies here.
I have read Wong Kim Ark, thoroughly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.