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

Skip to comments.

Thomas Breaks Tradition: Forces Supreme Court to Look at Obama Citizenship Case
THE AFRO-AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS ^ | 12/3/08 | James Wright, AFRO Staff Reporter

Posted on 12/03/2008 11:43:31 PM PST by BP2

 
U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
By James Wright
AFRO Staff Writer

(December 3, 2008) - In a highly unusual move, U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has asked his colleagues on the court to consider the request of an East Brunswick, N.J. attorney who has filed a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama’s status as a United States citizen.

Thomas’s action took place after Justice David Souter had rejected a petition known as an application for a stay of writ of certiorari that asked the court to prevent the meeting of the Electoral College on Dec. 15, which will certify Obama as the 44th president of the United States and its first African-American president.

The court has scheduled a Dec. 5 conference on the writ -- just 10 days before the Electoral College meets.

The high court’s only African American is bringing the matter to his colleagues as a result of the writ that was filed by attorney Leo Donofrio. Donofrio sued the New Jersey Secretary of State Nina Wells, contending that Obama was not qualified to be on the state’s presidential ballot because of Donofrio’s own questions about Obama citizenship.

Donofrio is a retired lawyer who identifies himself as a “citizen’s advocate.” The AFRO learned that he is a contributor to naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com, a Web site that raises questions about Obama’s citizenship.

Calls made to Donofrio’s residence were not returned to the AFRO by press time.

Donofrio is questioning Obama’s citizenship because the former Illinois senator, whose mom was from Kansas, was born in Hawaii and his father was a Kenyan national. Therefore, Donofrio argues, Obama’s dual citizenship does not make Obama “a natural born citizen” as required by Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution, which states:

“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…”

...to prevent the meeting of the Electoral College on Dec. 15, which
will certify Obama as the 44th president of the United States...

Donofrio had initially tried to remove the names not only of Obama, but also the names of Republican Party presidential nominee John McCain and Socialist Workers’ Party Roger Calero from appearing on the Nov. 4 general election ballot in his home state of New Jersey.

McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone when it was a U.S. possession. Calero would be ineligible to be president because he was born in Nicaragua.
After his efforts were unsuccessful in the New Jersey court system, he decided to take his case to a higher level.

On Nov. 6, Souter denied the stay. Donofrio, following the rules of the procedure for the Supreme Court, re-submitted the application as an emergency stay in accordance to Rule 22, which states, in part, that an emergency stay can be given to another justice, which is the choice of the petitioner.

Donofrio’s choice was Thomas. He submitted the emergency stay to Thomas’s office on Nov. 14.  Thomas accepted the application on Nov. 19 and on that day, submitted it for consideration by his eight colleagues - known as a conference - and scheduled it for Dec. 5.

On Nov. 26, a supplemental brief was filed by Donofrio to the clerk’s office of the Supreme Court. A letter to the court explaining the reason for the emergency stay was filed on Dec. 1 at the clerk’s office.

Thomas’s actions were rare because, by custom, when a justice rejects a petition from his own circuit, the matter is dead. Even if, as can be the case under Rule 22, the matter can be submitted to another justice for consideration, that justice out of respect, will reject it also, said Trevor Morrison, a professor of law at Columbia University School of Law.

Morrison said that Thomas’s actions are once in a decade.  “When that does happen, the case has to be of an extraordinary nature and this does not fit that circumstance,” he said. “My guess would be that Thomas accepted the case so it would go before the conference where it will likely be denied. If Thomas denied the petition, then Donofrio would be free to go to the other justices for their consideration.  

“This way, I would guess, the matter would be done with.  Petitions of Donofrio’s types are hardly ever granted.”

Traditionally, justices do not respond to media queries, according to a spokesman from the Supreme Court Public Information Office.

Thomas was appointed to the Supreme Court by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 and has been one of its most conservative members.

Before his ascension to the court, he was appointed by Bush to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Earlier, he served as chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - appointed by President Reagan - and worked various jobs under former Republican Sen. John Danforth.

It would take a simple majority of five justices to put Donofrio’s emergency stay on the oral argument docket. Because it is an emergency by design, the argument would take place within days.

Donofrio wants the court to order the Electoral College to postpone its Dec. 15 proceedings until it rules on the Obama citizenship. He is using the 2000 case Bush vs. Gore case as precedent, arguing that it is of such compelling national interest that it should be given priority over other cases on the court’s docket.

“The same conditions apply here,” Donofrio said in his letter to the court, “as the clock is ticking down to Dec. 15, the day for the Electoral College to meet.”

Audrey Singer, a senior fellow at Washington’s Brookings Institution, who is an expert on immigration, said that the Donofrio matter is “going nowhere.”

“There is no way that anyone can argue about whether Barack Obama is a citizen,” Singer said. “In this country, we have a system known as jus soli or birthright by citizenship. You are a citizen by being born on American soil and he (Obama) was born in Hawaii.”

Singer said that Donofrio’s argument that Obama’s father was a Kenyan national does not matter because citizenship is not based on parentage, but on where someone was born.

“This is the issue that some people have with illegal aliens in our country,” she said. “Children of illegal aliens, if they are born in the United States, are U.S. citizens. That is in the U.S. Constitution.”

 



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bho2008; birthcertificate; case; certifigate; constitution; court; lawsuit; naturalborncitizen; notthisshiitagain; obama; obamatransitionfile; obamatruthfile; president; scotus; supreme; supremecourt; take; talkradioignores; tinfoil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 921-922 next last
To: Uncle Chip
True enough, but there are millions of American citizens who obtained their citizenship thru birthright citizenship and hold American passports. IMO, the only way we can change our current laws and practice on birthright citizenship is thru a Consitutional amendment.

Anchor babies: the Irish got it right

201 posted on 12/04/2008 6:59:15 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: BP2
This case is coming before the court so they won't have to hear a case questioning the "fact" that Obama was actually born on U.S. soil. This is ass-covering time for the court. With it, they can dismiss, and the media can say that "the supreme Court has rejected all arguments against Obama's citizenship". Obama is going to be president, whether he's Constitutionally qualified for the office, or not.
202 posted on 12/04/2008 6:59:31 AM PST by zeugma (Will it be nukes or aliens? Time will tell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TChris
For the gazillionth time... The Constitution requires that the President be a Natural born citizen, not just a citizen.

If you think that in 2008 the USSC is going to recognize that there are "first class" (natural born) and "second class" Americans citizens, all born on American soil, you're crazy.

203 posted on 12/04/2008 7:00:03 AM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
The children of illegal aliens are most certainly NOT "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"

So, we couldn't charge them with a crime or make them pay taxes? Are you claiming that the children of illegals effectively have diplomatic immunity?

204 posted on 12/04/2008 7:03:18 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

“... we don’t demand that in order to be a citizen you must renounce all other national ties.”

at one point in time, during my more productive years, foreign nationals becoming naturalized US citizens, were required to denounce their previous citizenship.


205 posted on 12/04/2008 7:03:32 AM PST by elpadre (nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
>>> NO case heard in the Supreme Court has EVER held that birthright citizenship is granted under the 14th Amendment to the children of people in the United States illegally. Or legally, for that matter, if not admitted as immigrants

Yes, and by the same token, the SCOTUS has never "ruled" on the term "Natural Born Citizen" in context to the COTUS and it's requirements of the President.

If it's "not a problem," why is it that Andrew Jackson was the last President who had a parent born out of the US, back in 1837? More than 150 years ago?

Just a coincidence? Yeah, right...

206 posted on 12/04/2008 7:04:27 AM PST by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Haha!!! Love your comment re: post #21!


207 posted on 12/04/2008 7:06:57 AM PST by sneakers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99

“All persons 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.”

“If you’re born in the United States, you are a citizen of the US. Period.”

Yes, one born on US soil is a US citizen. But unless one’s parents were citizens, he/she is not a “natural born” citizen.


208 posted on 12/04/2008 7:08:01 AM PST by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BP2

Chester Alan Arthur was the son of Irish born preacher William Arthur and Vermont born Malvina Stone Arthur. He was President from 1881-85.


209 posted on 12/04/2008 7:09:06 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: sneakers; Windflier

One thing is for sure -

Thomas’ wife is NOT going to be welcome in the black social circles in DC...


210 posted on 12/04/2008 7:09:27 AM PST by MrB (The 0bamanation: Marxism, Infanticide, Appeasement, Depression, Thuggery, and Censorship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
These are people, who through the circumstance of their birth, are US citizens, but not Natural Born Citizens, such as American children born of parents in foreign countries, and not on the soil of a US embassy, or military base.

American bases and embassies are not US territory. That is simply an urban myth. If they were American territory, the host countries could not kick us out of them without leading to a war. Being born on a military base or embassy does not, in of itself, grant citizenship.

But, the children of American citizens born overseas, whether on a military base or not, are American citizens from birth and qualify to serve as President under the COTUS.

You, and Donofrio, are creating artificial distinctions that do no exist in either the COTUS or Federal law. There are only two classes of American citizen: naturalized (who cannot serve as President) and citizens from birth (who can).

211 posted on 12/04/2008 7:10:49 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth
Is Bobby Jindal eligble to run for President? His parents were not US citizens when he was born in the US?

Piyush Jindal (pronounced /ˈdʒɪndəl/) was born on June 10, 1971 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, to Punjabi Indian immigrants Amar and Raj Jindal, who had recently arrived for Raj to attend graduate school at Louisiana State University. His mother Amar left India and his ancestral family village of Khanpura in 1970.

212 posted on 12/04/2008 7:13:29 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

One born on US soil is a US citizen.

One born on US soil of US citizen parents is a “natural born” citizen.


213 posted on 12/04/2008 7:14:25 AM PST by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: BP2

I heard Leo Donofrio state that his case was referred to Conference by the whole court, not just Justice Thomas. Leo said that that was a good sign.


214 posted on 12/04/2008 7:17:27 AM PST by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek
That statement is false. Around the world, parent can and do, quite frequently, emigrate to other countries. Many of them then apply for the citizenship of those other countries. Many of those countries require the renunciation of one's previous citizenship before they confer the new citizenship.

Which is completely irrelevant under US law. A parent cannot renounce their minor child's US citizenship under US law.

The U.S. requires immigrants applying for naturalization to renounce their previous citizenship.

No, it doesn't. I became a naturalized US citizen in 2007. I still remain a citizen of 2 other countries, which is perfectly legal under US law.

215 posted on 12/04/2008 7:17:45 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade
I agree with everything you said except the part about US embassies. For all extents and purposes, they are treated as US soil except from local laws and regulations per international conventions and treaties. Embassies have been used as places of sanctuary from host governments in many, many cases.
216 posted on 12/04/2008 7:20:05 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

That is not the question. U.S. law, and Supreme Court decisions, both state that a person born in the U.S. is a citizen at birth. What is the difference between ‘citizen at birth’ and ‘natural born citizen’ and where is this difference defined by law?


217 posted on 12/04/2008 7:21:18 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

What about persons born abroad to Amcit parents? Natural born or not?


218 posted on 12/04/2008 7:21:52 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

And only natural born citizens, or persons who are citizens of the U.S. while the Constitution was being adopted, are eligible to become President, Correct?


219 posted on 12/04/2008 7:22:03 AM PST by classified
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: BP2
BOTH PARENTS MUST BE U.S. CITIZENS AND THE CHILD MUST BE BORN ON U.S. SOIL.

You just made this up.

Andrew Jackson was the son of two parents who were not born on U.S. soil. Five other presidents (Thomas Jefferson, James Buchanan, Chester Arthur, Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover) each had one parent not born on U.S. soil. Obama would be the sixth president to have one parent not born on U.S. soil.

This "natural born = both parents born on U.S. soil" argument is completely bogus and fabricated and exists nowhere in the U.S. Constitution.

220 posted on 12/04/2008 7:23:05 AM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 921-922 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