Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush v. Gore judge: Your evidence, Mr. Obama
WND ^ | May 31, 2012 | Bob Unruh

Posted on 05/31/2012 6:26:26 PM PDT by Seizethecarp

A hearing has been scheduled in a Florida court to allow attorneys representing the White House to support their claim that the term “natural born citizen” in the U.S. Constitution means something other than the offspring of two American citizens.

Judge Terry Lewis in Leon County has set a hearing for June 18 to consider arguments from both sides of a challenge to Obama’s name on the 2012 state election ballot.

Lewis is credited with making crucial rulings in the contested 2000 presidential election, when ultimately a Florida vote recount was halted by the U.S. Supreme Court and George W. Bush was declared the winner.

Attorney Larry Klayman’s law firm filed the challenge to Obama’s name on the ballot on behalf of Democrat Michael Voeltz, “a registered member of the Democrat Party, voter, and taxpayer in Broward County, who was an eligible elector for the Florida Primary of Jan. 31, 2012.”

Klayman told WND that during a hearing today on discovery issues in the case, Lewis noted that while Klayman’s brief cited a U.S. Supreme Court’s decision defining “natural born citizen” as the offspring of two citizens of the nation, the White House’s arguments provided no citations.

Klayman had cited the U.S. Supreme Court case Minor v. Happersett from 1875.

Lewis ordered further briefing on the issue before the hearing.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: article2section1; ballotchallenge; birthcertificate; certifigate; eligibility; happersett; ineligible; klayman; minor; minorvhappersett; naturalborncitizen; obama; usurper
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last
Judge Lewis is the FL lower court judge whose rock solid ruling in favor of Bush was ultimately vindicated by SCOTUS after being overturned by the FL State Supremes, who made a transparently partisan ruling.

This has the making of being the next media scrum and cause of panic in Chicago Obot HQ!

1 posted on 05/31/2012 6:26:36 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp; hoosiermama; null and void; LucyT; butterdezillion; Danae; Spaulding

Thanks for posting this.


2 posted on 05/31/2012 6:29:51 PM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; melancholy; null and void; Brown Deer; Red Steel; Kenny Bunk
ping...

FL district Judge Lewis who wrote a superior ruling in Bush v. Gore ultimately upheld in part by SCOTUS, challenges Barry's legal team to cite a SCOTUS definition of NBC superior to the MvH case NBC definition cited by Klayman! Woohoo!

3 posted on 05/31/2012 6:31:27 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

How come WingNut Daily is the only one reporting on this? No one is going to give a damn unless it makes it into the real news outlets.


4 posted on 05/31/2012 6:34:14 PM PDT by Semper911 (When you want to rob Peter to pay Paul, you'll always have the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
The Fogblowers are really going to hate this...especially with the Bush v. Gore connection via the judge!

(Hi there Fogblowers!)

5 posted on 05/31/2012 6:35:38 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Semper911

“No one is going to give a damn unless it makes it into the real news outlets.”

I suggest patience. Leon County is in the boonies. Just wait until the MSM and Obot Fogblowers get the courthouse keyed into their GPS systems! They will be there, IMO.


6 posted on 05/31/2012 6:39:53 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
I thought the trial judge was N. Saunders Sauls. Which judge was this?

-PJ

7 posted on 05/31/2012 6:40:10 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

I don’t mind quoting from the thread post:

“Judge Terry Lewis in Leon County has set a hearing for June 18 to consider arguments from both sides of a challenge to Obama’s name on the 2012 state election ballot.

“Lewis is credited with making crucial rulings in the contested 2000 presidential election, when ultimately a Florida vote recount was halted by the U.S. Supreme Court and George W. Bush was declared the winner.”


8 posted on 05/31/2012 6:44:17 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Yeah, I read that. I thought Sauls was the hero judge. Sauls was the contest judge. Maybe this guy was the recount judge?

-PJ

9 posted on 05/31/2012 6:48:45 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: El Sordo; Tex-Con-Man; Danae

Interesting. Maybe we’ll see an actual examination of the definition.


10 posted on 05/31/2012 6:50:24 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Man is not free unless government is limited. ~Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
I am no fan of Larry Klayman, but it is long past time that FReepers backed off chasing the clown/criminal act in Hawaii -- and just let Arpaio's guys do their job there.

The REAL question is that of Øbozo's Constitutional eligibility, which he clearly does not have, since he has a severe loyalty conflict, via his father's non-citizenship and his own inheritance of that same disloyalty.

Of course, his Muslim background further exacerbates the issue -- but the first Amendment pretty well covers his @$$ on that one...

~~~~~~~~~~~~

One can only hope that Lewis does find him ineligible, and that will be the kick that starts other State SOSes toppling like dominoes! And, then, after the election, (no matter who wins) America will have to face the incomprehensible mess of dealing with the aftermath of four years without a valid President at the helm... :-(

Does any State still have a working electric chair for Pelosi?

11 posted on 05/31/2012 6:52:17 PM PDT by TXnMA ("Allah": Satan's current alias...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

“Leon County is in the boonies.”

Tallahassee is in the boonies?


12 posted on 05/31/2012 6:55:22 PM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Now that you mention it, I think I am thinking of Sauls, too. I wanted to get the story up fast so I haven’t had a chance to refresh my memory of the Bush v. Gore saga, yet.


13 posted on 05/31/2012 6:59:00 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
Sorry. It was judge Sauls who was in the boonies...

I apologize to any offended N. Floridians!

14 posted on 05/31/2012 7:00:38 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Another ‘dog and pony show’ exercise in futility. I bet Obama’s lawyers don’t even appear, nor will they be admonished for it.


15 posted on 05/31/2012 7:00:54 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

The case is entitled Voeltz v. Obama, et. al. (No. 2012 CA 467) and is being heard in the Circuit Court Of The Second Judicial Circuit In And For Leon County, Florida.

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/florida-court-sets-hearing-on-obama-ballot-challenge-for-june-18-2012


16 posted on 05/31/2012 7:01:30 PM PDT by VeniVidiVici (Congrats to Ted Kennedy! He's been sober for two years now!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

There is the element of a higher percentage of Florida Crackers in that area...


17 posted on 05/31/2012 7:03:03 PM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

18 posted on 05/31/2012 7:05:18 PM PDT by Hotlanta Mike (Resurrect the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC)...before there is no America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Thanks for keeping us informed.


19 posted on 05/31/2012 7:05:54 PM PDT by hoosiermama ( Obama: " born in Kenya."..Is he lying now or lying then?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

I’ll be following this one but ... damn ... I hate to get my hopes up again.

I was sure that case in Georgia was the clincher.

Still, seeing Obummer excluded from the Florida ballot would be sweet indeed!


20 posted on 05/31/2012 7:06:20 PM PDT by DNME (A monarch's neck should always have a noose around it. It keeps him upright. — Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA
Does any State still have a working electric chair for Pelosi?

I'd like to think that one isn't needed, and that one day not too far in the future, that Almighty God Himself will light up her botox'd azz with a major league lightning bolt.
21 posted on 05/31/2012 7:07:50 PM PDT by mkjessup (Eternal Vigilance (aka FReeper Tom Hoefling) has my vote for President in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Sorry, I was confusing Judge Saul with Judge Lewis. Here is an NY Times story about one of numerous Lewis rulings:

begin quote:

COUNTING THE VOTE: THE COURT TACTICS; A Dark Day Turns Less So for the Democrats, Allowing Them to Forgo Escalation

By DAVID FIRESTONE

Vice Pres Al Gore’s campaign suffers a blow when Judge Terry P Lewis allows Katherine Harris, Florida’s secretary of state, to certify results of presidential election without the hand recounts, but it is buoyed six hours later when State Supreme Court bars Harris from certifying the election until court says she may; photo
November 18, 2000

end quote


22 posted on 05/31/2012 7:09:29 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
the White House’s arguments provided no citations.

They never once in all the ( OBot count) 134 cases has Obama brought up citations that he is a Natural Born US Citizen. Not once has Obama - never and nope. They've argued mostly on justiciability standing grounds.

Lets see if this judge has some balls.

23 posted on 05/31/2012 7:10:56 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA

And, then, after the election, (no matter who wins) America will have to face the incomprehensible mess of dealing with the aftermath of four years without a valid President at the helm... :-( “”’

I think that we can deal with unraveling his outrageous Executive Orders and other demands and his list of hidden Czars much easier than we can deal with 4 more years of him running amuck.....

With the next 4 years leading to his being termed out, he will be even more unhinged with what he demands, IMO.

Everything he has done is a long laundry list of acts which are definately outrageous and I still feel some
are totally illegal- such as seizing GM & giving the stock to the Unions.

From demanding that each and every street sign in the USA be changed over to a ‘one size/type fits all’, he has done some pretty crazy things.

I think the red herring all along has been the phony Birth Certificate. It is obviously a phony. The name of the hospital is wrong for the date of Barry’s ‘birth’. The name on the certificate is the name of the hospital given when it was merged with another hospital in 1978!!!

No matter if Barry was born in the Lincoln bedroom in the White House, he is still NOT a Natural Born Citizen. His ‘daddy’ was NOt a citizen. Period.


24 posted on 05/31/2012 7:11:33 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama

Pedaling as fast as I can...a bit too fast sometimes...


25 posted on 05/31/2012 7:12:18 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
The Fogblowers are really going to hate this...especially with the Bush v. Gore connection via the judge! (Hi there Fogblowers!)

Only about an hour ago, I responded to a typical FoGBlower's post on another site that if this judge honestly adjudicates this case in accordance with and upholding the intentions of the Constitutional authors, they lose.

26 posted on 05/31/2012 7:15:27 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Semper911
How come WingNut Daily is the only one reporting on this?

Well based on your attitude it must be because they are nuts, right? Some day soon the WND critics here at FR will be crawling over broken glass to shake hands with Joe Farah and Jerry Corsi for their work and dedication to uncovering Obama's buried past.

27 posted on 05/31/2012 7:27:02 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Here, let me make the Foggers’ case for them.

The Framers thought that restricting POTUS to the offspring of two citizens was a bad idea because they really, really liked the idea of presidents w divided loyalties. They thought a president who could pretend to be loyal to the US while really being loyal to the country of his foreign parent or parents was a fine and dandy thing. They would have loved the way Obama runs around the world trashing the USA and fawning over our worst enemies.

What? That argument won’t fly?

Lol. Well then maybe just maybe the Framers DIDN’T want to risk POTUSs w divided loyalties. What a novel idea. /s


28 posted on 05/31/2012 7:32:19 PM PDT by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles
"No matter if Barry was born in the Lincoln bedroom in the White House, he is still NOT a Natural Born Citizen. His ‘daddy’ was NOt a citizen. Period."

It isn't known who his real father is or where he was born. We have yet to see a valid document stating such. It is precisely "that we don't know whether or not he is eligible to serve" that is the reason we do know he is not a legal President.

The Twentieth Amendment, Section 3:

"3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified."

A few notes.

1. There is no such position as a "President elect", legally, until such a time as Congress has accepted the results of the electoral college votes and a person is actually named as the "President elect". This means that the term "shall have qualified" refers to something other than the results of winning an election. There is only one place left in the Constitution having to do with "qualifications" for the office of President, that being the eligibility requirements from Article two.

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

2. Since it is the duty of Congress to name an interim President in the event of a President elect's "failure to qualify", they, Congress, must know whether or not to do so. This means that they, Congress, must be aware of whether or not a President elect meets the eligibility requirements from Article two. It is the burden of the President elect to "qualify" or "fail to qualify", thus NOT proving one is eligible under Article Two to Congress is the same thing as "failing to qualify."

3. How was Obama's eligibility proven to Congress without a valid long form birth certificate? He apparently does not possess such a thing or we would have seen it a million times by now.

4. The eligibility requirements start out with two simple words which forever preclude anyone who "fails to qualify" from serving as a legal president, "No person". Someone who sneaks in because Congress failed to uphold it's responsibility to enforce the Twentieth Amendment, section 3 doesn't legally exist. The Constitution cannot be fooled just because Congress didn't act when it was supposed to. A President elect either qualifies or he cannot ever be President, period.

Thus it is that we have protection from someone who is ineligible to serve as President already written into the Constitution. Unfortunately, we also have a Congress that did not uphold it's oath to support the Constitution and a usurpation of the office of President is the result. We know he is illegal strictly on the basis that we don't know if he is eligible. If he "qualified", there would be no debating the subject. The fact that nobody in Congress is able to say whether or not he is eligible means that he never proved to them that he was and thus has "failed to qualify".

29 posted on 05/31/2012 7:37:38 PM PDT by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Translation: Hillary doesn’t want to wait until 2016.


30 posted on 05/31/2012 7:38:49 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Ich habe keinen Konig aber Gott)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

gonna stop driving the car....will start aiming it.


31 posted on 05/31/2012 7:47:32 PM PDT by hoosiermama ( Obama: " born in Kenya."..Is he lying now or lying then?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Semper911
No one is going to give a damn unless it makes it into the real news outlets.

They haven't yet figured out who they are going to interview from the legal team and shout down MSNBC-style.

32 posted on 05/31/2012 7:49:07 PM PDT by CommieCutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

WND is the reason it’s gone this far. I agree.


33 posted on 05/31/2012 7:50:53 PM PDT by CommieCutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

LoL. BTW, those delusional Foggers just “love” your posts. You’ve been cited more than a few times in their “Birther Potpourri” thread. ;-)


34 posted on 05/31/2012 7:55:24 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

If Obie Won gets kicked off the ballot in Florida, that could be (as Trump says) Yuuuuuge!


35 posted on 05/31/2012 8:04:53 PM PDT by OrangeHoof (Our economy won't heal until one particular black man is unemployed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Sham

Well said.

Do you think Joe Biden realizes that he is in fact the president of the United States?


36 posted on 05/31/2012 8:16:51 PM PDT by atc23 (The Confederacy was the single greatest conservative resistance to federal authority ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

The Dirty “little” Secret Of The Natural Born Citizen Clause Revealed.

I have emphasized the word “little” because the truth of the law on this issue is very simple, folks. So simple that the mystery is deciphered by application of one of the most clear, concise and undeniable rules of law; the code of statutory construction governs, and therefore, “natural born Citizen” must require something more than being born in the United States.

Let me put it to you in appropriately simple language:

Clause A = “Only a natural born Citizen may be President.”

Clause B = “Anyone born in the United States is a Citizen.”

(While these two clauses reflect Article 2, Section 1, and the 14th Amendment, I shall refer to them as “Clause A” and “Clause B” for now.)

The code of statutory construction is learned by every student in law school, and every practicing attorney has confronted it. Every judge is required to apply the rule equally to all statutes, and the Constitution. There is no wiggle room at all. The rule states that when a court examines two clauses, unless Congress has made it clear that one clause repeals the other, the court must observe a separate legal effect for each. More specifically, regardless of the chronology of enactment, the general clause can never govern the specific.

Clause B is a general rule of citizenship, which states that all persons born in the country are members of the nation.

Clause A is a specific clause that says only those members of the nation who are “natural born” may be President.

According to the rule of statutory construction, the court must determine that Clause A requires something more than Clause B.

It’s truly that simple. ...

from:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/the-dirty-little-secret-of-the-natural-born-citizen-clause-revealed/


37 posted on 05/31/2012 8:21:47 PM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

see also:

AMICUS BRIEF – Georgia POTUS Eligibility Cases.

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/amicus-brief-georgia-potus-eligibility-cases/


38 posted on 05/31/2012 8:23:12 PM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

In Minor v. Happersett, in 1875, the Supreme Court, made an incidental reference to the issue: “[N]ew citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization. The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

It was never doubted, until Obama was selected.


39 posted on 05/31/2012 8:24:14 PM PDT by chatter4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

“Leon County is in the boonies.”

Perhaps it looks that way, but the county seat of Leon County is Tallahassee, the capitol of Florida. This, IMHO, moves the county out of the boonies.

But, you are right, it isn’t on either coast and is definitely somewhere in “fly over country”. I do suggest that like 2000/2001 court activity in Leon County in 2012 could be very interesting.


40 posted on 05/31/2012 8:24:14 PM PDT by Nip (TANSTAAFL and BOHICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: atc23

I think Joe would consider that a BFD!


41 posted on 05/31/2012 8:25:44 PM PDT by Tucker39 ( Psa 68:19Blessed be the Lord, who daily loadeth us with benefits; even the God of our salvation.KJV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

While Marco Rubio was born in the US, but his parents were not naturalized citizens until after his birth, he shares the same disability as Obama. Neither is “natural born”.


42 posted on 05/31/2012 8:25:44 PM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA
One can only hope that Lewis does find him ineligible, and that will be the kick that starts other State SOSes toppling like dominoes! And, then, after the election, (no matter who wins) America will have to face the incomprehensible mess of dealing with the aftermath of four years without a valid President at the helm...

I think that if there was actually a decision on the matter, and I sincerely doubt there will be in my lifetime, that the SCOTUS would rule that the overriding power in the electoral process is the electoral college, and that if they decided after the election to turn around and make a six year old boy the president, it would be valid.

The reasoning would likely center on the checks and balances in place - Congress has the power to remove a sitting president, especially one which does not meet the constitutional requirements to hold the office. This controversy has been around for quite some time, and Congress absolutely had the power to demand any evidence they wanted in verifying Obama's qualifications for office.

So I think, no matter how you cut it, as far as the constitution is concerned, we've had a valid president the entire time. Besides, let's say that a miracle happened, and that the SCOTUS threw out the vote of the electoral college, stating that Obama wasn't qualified to be president, and included throwing out the electors for the vice president... Do you really want to have President Nancy Pelosi for any moment of time?

I'm pretty sure that the SCOTUS, even their most extreme members, don't want to even contemplate that. Visiting a qualification for a ballot, however, and actually ruling on NBC - that I could see them do. Most likely, however, would be that we'd least like to see a ruling from SCOTUS on the issue. If they did bring it into session, it would mean they'd welcome the chance to revisit the old NBC definition, which would most likely be to overturn it.

43 posted on 05/31/2012 8:28:17 PM PDT by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Exposing Obama for the usurper he is, in my opinion, is the only means the GOPe has to successfully weaken the democrats enough to clear a path to victory for their man Romney. And ... as much as I detest Romney's political leanings ... I would not be too disappointed in any outcome in November given that all of Obama's "accomplishments" these years were rendered unconstitutional and legally tossed out with him.


44 posted on 05/31/2012 8:30:01 PM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Lol. I bet they love me to death over there. I had a nice chat w one of them over here the other day. A real moonbat’s moonbat. Upon reflection, I don’t think it was the Ten Miles of Bad Road guy. He was a lot of fun just the same. ;)


45 posted on 05/31/2012 8:32:50 PM PDT by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

sfl


46 posted on 05/31/2012 8:39:04 PM PDT by phockthis (http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/index.htm ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: kingu
If they did bring it into session, it would mean they'd welcome the chance to revisit the old NBC definition, which would most likely be to overturn it.

If by "the old NBC definition" (born of on the soil of the country of parents who are citizens of the country, see Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 (1874)), what makes you think they would overturn it?

47 posted on 05/31/2012 8:40:06 PM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
“While Marco Rubio was born in the US, but his parents were not naturalized citizens until after his birth, he shares the same disability as Obama. Neither is ‘natural born’.”

Stipulating for the moment that Barry's alleged narrative is true (I doubt it) Barry would have ONE US citizen parent compared to Rubio’s ZERO US citizen parents.

This is a distinction which may or may not amount to a difference, depending on what SCOTUS should rule if a case came to them.

48 posted on 05/31/2012 8:41:37 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

there is also this tidbit...

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html

stating citizenship cannot be conveyed by a parent unless that parent was in the US for FIVE(5) years after the age of 14

0bama’s mother was 18 when she gave birth

therefore, the ONLY way 0bama could be a citizen, forget being a natural born citizen, would be if he was born on US soil...

which we have no proof of
(the certificate of live birth has been shown by law enforcement to be a forgery)


49 posted on 05/31/2012 8:50:14 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Semper911

‘real news outlets’??

careful, your progressive infiltrator roots are showing

want real news? read free republic. nuf said


50 posted on 05/31/2012 8:52:35 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson