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 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 921-922 next last
To: Las Vegas Dave
My wife just walked into the room as I got to the photo, now she said she knows why I spend so much time on Freerepublic... I had to do some ‘splainin!!!!!

Oops - hey at least it was underwear stuff - tell her I was helping you shop for ideas for her Christmas presents.

421 posted on 12/04/2008 3:16:48 PM PST by IrishPennant (He that is good for making excuses is seldom good for anything else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: thesetruths
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.... There is no comma after "States" and before "at" in the copy on my wall.

Strange, the copy I have does have a comma after "States", although I don't think it changes the meaning or intent:

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....

422 posted on 12/04/2008 3:17:19 PM PST by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Sounds like Donofrio ignored the case law, specifically US vs. Wong Kim Ark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

The gist of it: if Obama was born in Hawaii, his parents’ citizenship is completely irrelevant, so long as neither of them is a foreign diplomat or part of a hostile occupying force.

This is going nowhere fast.


423 posted on 12/04/2008 3:21:36 PM PST by kenboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm
I'm not an Obamacrat, I have a copy of the Constitution in my hand, and I've only gotten this far on this thread, and so far, I've seen only Constitutional distinction regarding citizenship I've seen is 1) born in the U.S. or 2) naturalized in the U.S., with the caveat of being subject to U.S. jurisdiction.

So far, I haven't seen a third category in COTUS or law distinguishing something called "natural born" citizen as opposed to simply born in the U.S.

424 posted on 12/04/2008 3:24:55 PM PST by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; All

“The Supreme Court Justices know this, and I trust that they will move with high regard for the critical importance and urgency it deserves. To do otherwise will invite chaos at every level.”

I hope you are right; I really, really do. I want to know if Mr. Obama can rightfully be sworn into office. I agree it will dog him if it isn’t resolved (but I think it will die down in time). I do not think the comparison with the 2000 election is appropo though. Something had to be done then, chaos was looming. This issue (BC - citizenship) appears to only really matter to a small percentage of us (it does matter to me). However, 99% of the population don’t really care, and of course, the MSM is keeping them in the dark. And those of us who care are not insurrectionists, we respect law and order. It will hurt the country in the long run, but most of us will eventually go silent until he (Mr. Obama) does something really eggregious.

Summary - I don’t know what will happen. I want the SCOTUS to examine this, but I am a pessismist and don’t think they will (no good reason other than I am a pessimist). If they do run with it, I will be chearing!


425 posted on 12/04/2008 3:26:23 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: BP2

“DONOFRIO IS SAYING OBAMA CANNOT BE A “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN,” BECAUSE HIS FATHER WAS A BRITISH CITIZEN AT THE TIME OF OBAMA’S BIRTH.”

That is patently ridiculous. Where the parents were born matter not. If a person is born in the United States, he is a natural born American citizen.

The question is exactly where Obama was born. If he was born in Kenya or Indonesia, he is not a natural born citizen of the US, and ineligible to be POTUS.

If he was born in Hawaii, he is.

What about a child born abroad to two American parents who register his birth immediately at the American Embassy in that country. How would this affect children born to American citizens working or studying abroad?


426 posted on 12/04/2008 3:30:03 PM PST by Cincinna (TIME TO REBUILD * JINDAL* PALIN * CANTOR 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216
Yes, it's strange! Don't know why this fancy framed Constitution I have is different, but I think it's more accurate as to intent.
427 posted on 12/04/2008 3:30:12 PM PST by thesetruths
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn
Neither is being a naturalized citizen, but neither of these comply with the intent of the founders' that US presidents should have no divided loyalties.

And you base this on...?

428 posted on 12/04/2008 3:32:13 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 387 | View Replies]

To: kenboy
Are you saying that the founders were not in fact ‘interested’ in the case of foreign citizenship of someones parent or parents, when it came to eligibility for the Presidency?
429 posted on 12/04/2008 3:33:28 PM PST by freepersup (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 423 | View Replies]

To: mrs9x

What is the issue of the birth certificate? Looks like there’s a copy showing he’s born in Hawaii. The only other piece of evidence that seems to be missing is verification by confirmation of his birth hospital records.


430 posted on 12/04/2008 3:34:32 PM PST by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
I do not think the comparison with the 2000 election is appropo though. Something had to be done then, chaos was looming. This issue (BC - citizenship) appears to only really matter to a small percentage of us (it does matter to me).

I hear what you say, and you're certainly entitled to your pessimism about the SC's probable handling of this, but I would counter that this issue is of extreme importance, has national security implications, and is cared about by a lot more than the 1% of the population that you indicate. You and I are among the few that speak up and discuss these things, but many more are quietly watching.

I'm crossing my fingers for Friday.

431 posted on 12/04/2008 3:34:35 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 425 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
"I think possibly Stevens still has a conscience."

It is pretty much all or nothing IMHO when it comes to the SCOTUS passing judgement. Stevens has not before demonstrated a conscience in accord with my own.

432 posted on 12/04/2008 3:34:43 PM PST by Radix (Posting cynical responses ever since...."What time is it anyhow?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
It may not be codified to your satisfaction in US law...

It is not codified anywhere I'm aware of.

...but the fact is, that statement comports with the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution.

OK, so point out where they defined the difference.

433 posted on 12/04/2008 3:35:37 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

“I’m crossing my fingers for Friday.”

Amen to that.


434 posted on 12/04/2008 3:39:07 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 431 | View Replies]

To: thesetruths

Someone posted earlier that a copy of the original parchment contains the comma, for what it’s worth. Still think text and intent are the same, however.


435 posted on 12/04/2008 3:39:15 PM PST by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Writings of the discussions of the framers of the Constitution during its development. Some of these points were made in Denofrio's filing.

You need to read more and troll less.

436 posted on 12/04/2008 3:42:57 PM PST by meadsjn (Socialists promote neighbors selling out their neighbors; Free Traitors promote just the opposite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 428 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Then, you've got children born to one US parent, and one foreign parent on US soil

We have no proof that he was born on US soil. We have what is alleged to be a certified Hawaiian COLB printed on a laser printer sometime around 2007. Where is the original vault copy? Where is the attending physician's signature? If the attending physician is still alive, where is his attestation that that his signature?

437 posted on 12/04/2008 3:43:03 PM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

I would run. I”m a citizen, just born in italy so i don’t qualify.

I still feel obama ran for president to promote his book and became the accidential president. But that is just my opinion. That is the law we need. Nobody who wrote a book can run for president within so many years of writing that book. These people don’t run because they think they have a chance they run to promote their books


438 posted on 12/04/2008 3:53:13 PM PST by genxer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: freepersup

That’s exactly what I’m saying. The founders were “interested” in the birthplace of the President, and not in the birthplace of his parents. “Natural born” citizens were those born within the country.


439 posted on 12/04/2008 3:54:00 PM PST by kenboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies]

To: thesetruths
Well, wouldn't those old guys have a hoot if they could see us today poring over their words--and commas--on computer screens!

Speaking of those old musty documents... I've been over at the National Archives, viewing/reading the Amendments. It's the first time that I've actually viewed the original documents. It's fascinating, especially when viewing the earliest ones written on parchment paper.

FYI: I'm heading off for a break (momentarily) to attend our communitys' downtown Christmas Parade. ;o)

440 posted on 12/04/2008 3:56:08 PM PST by freepersup (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 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