AMEND THE CONSTITUTION !
Repeal the 14th
retroactively , 25 years
Repeal the 14th
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3325800/posts?page=8#8
“Every Person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.” --Senator Jacob Howard, co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866.
“Repeal the 14th.”
Many judges have misrepresented the meaning of the Constitution. The 14th Amendment nowhere involves natural born citizenship. The case providing precedent for the “Anchor Baby” interpretation, Wong Kim Ark, rests entirely on the 14th Amendment and its plaintiff, Wong Kim, born in San Francisco to resident parents from China was not deemed a natural born citizen; the decision quoted Minor v. Happersett and made Wong Kim a “citizen”, naturalized at birth but not natural born. The opinion written by, Justice Gray, cites and quotes the precedent defining case Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 (1875):
“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 is depressing to read opinions from many beholden Federal Judges, who are all political appointees. Barack Obama was careful and credible when he told us “I was born a subject of the British Commonwealth; my father was a British subject, and by the British Nationality Act of 1948” so was I.” He has never declared himself a natural born citizen, knowing perfectly well, as his Harvard advisor Larry Tribe stated in the hearings to support John McCain’s questionable eligibility, Senate Resolution 511 in April 2008. Being born on our soil makes one a citizen but not a natural born citizen.
How foolish would our framers have been before the War of 1812 when many children were born on U.S. soil to British subjects, royalists, who never intended to reject The Crown, to define eligibility to the presidency/command of our military to include sworn enemies? Natural born citizenship is only in the Constitution to define presidential eligibility.
Since McCain wasn’t born on sovereign U.S. territory, Obama, his campaign co-chair McCaskill, Pat Leahy and a few others sponsored two actions to appear to solve McCain’s problems, shutting off eligibility questions from both parties, SB 2678 and SR511. They were both actions to protect McCain’s campaign, since no law prevents even non-citizens from campaigning for office. One candidate for the presidency in 2008 wasn’t even a citizen. The Green Party candidate Calero had a green card. He wasn’t on ballots in every state, but states have no requirement to check constitutional eligibility. Only Arizona required a statement by the party confirming Obama’s eligibility. There were, though I haven’t seen the letters in years, two versions of the Democrat Party eligibility form, one containing the term natural born citizen and one omitting it, both signed by Nancy Pelosi and not Barack. He is covered. His team is well lawyered-up; no surprise.
While the form of birthright citizenship being misconstrued and creating the anchor baby phenomenon should be reexamined, the 14th Amendment is built upon Article 1 Section 8, “Congress SHALL have the power.... to create an Uniform rule for Naturalization...” There are two classes of citizen, natural born and naturalized. Congress creates naturalized citizens only. It tried once, in 1790, to extend the definition of natural born citizens to include the children of two citizen parents born “beyond the seas.” Larry Tribe tried that ploy, as did several otherwise respected Republican pundits and candidates for the presidency. They assert that natural born citizenship was extended by the 1790 Nationality Act, but that act was rescinded in 1795, signed by George Washington, and no act has yet been passed to “repute” children of citizen parents not born on our sovereign soil as natural born. Otherwise the Supreme Court would be beholden to Congress, which could extend definitions when it felt the need, as it has for both Obama and McCain. This writer sees the need to include the children of parents serving our nation in the Military, but Barack and Clair McCaskill took a stab at it in February of 2008, the “Foreign Born Children of Military Citizens Natural Born Citizen Act,” SB 2678. It failed to pass out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was written to make McCain eligible. There needs to be such an act or interpretation, but that hasn’t yet happened.
Anchor babies are not natural born citizens but these days who really reads or honors the Constitution. At least Barack was honest enough to say publically that he considered the Constitution to be an historical relic, and suggested a number of amendments to enforce various “rights” he believed were the province of governments, the right to health care, the right to fair compensation, he right to own a home. He is an example of what the Constitution was written to exclude.
Born to parents, one of whom was also an alien, who openly declared their disgust with our form of government. Even our naturalization oath, which Obama is now in the process of revising, requires sole allegiance to the U.S. and our Constitution. Obama declared himself to be a citizen of the world, a “global citizen”. He was careful and never lied about his constitutional ineligibility. Obama, with some difficulty, and after two previous tries, said the oath, and not (I may be corrected) over the Koran, like the Muslim Congressman from Minnesota, Keith Ellison.
Why did no Congressman object when all probably know Obama is ineligible? Georgia Congressman Nathan Deal did object. He wrote an open letter to the White House in January 2009 asking them to end the questions by clarifying Obama’s eligibility. Their response was to loose the IRS on Deal’s returns for at least a decade. The White House response was to unleash the Justice Department based upon old tax returns, an unwinnable battle since legal costs are born by the taxpayer. Deal resigned and became governor of Georgia. No public official has dared open his or her mouth after that.