Posted on 08/02/2009 1:35:53 AM PDT by rxsid
Edited on 08/06/2009 12:10:02 AM PDT by John Robinson. [history]
Attorney Taitz filed a NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Expedite authentication, MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory for authenticity of Kenyan birth certificate filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD.
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/ (site has been the target of hackers, proceed with caution — John)
You are right. It was ChiefEngineer.
This has probably been answered several times over, but I am trying to catch up, so none-the-less ... the copy you are looking at is a certified copy of the original certificate, requested, as BP2 so eloquently illustrated perhaps why, 3 years later. The typed name is affirmation of the signature on file.
Consider, perhaps, that ‘a subject’ can be a slave without being ‘a citizen’.
Let’s say the question of eligibility goes to the Supreme Court. Would Judge Sotomayor have to recuse herself? After all, it was Obama who nominated her.
Yeah, and 2 of those three were by his own weapon...
a local Hawaii official doesn’t have the authority to deem Obama a natural born citizen. That was decided the day he was born one way or the other. I don’t think she was there. Records PLURAL, YES! WHAT records? This statement is not PROOF, and why the heck would we take this peon’s word for it?
Hi bjorn14,
The US Constitution does require citizenship status for U.S.Senators. Article 1, Section 3, Clause 3: "No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."
Green cards do not provide citizenship but grant, instead "Lawful Permanent Residence" According to the US Immigration web site,"United States citizenship is one step beyond permanent residency (Green Card). US citizenship gives an individual the maximum rights available in the United States."
State Senators (at least in my state), need only be citizens, as you stated, but there is a higher standard for U.S. Senators. So, it seems to me, that Mr. Keyes may have been twice-wronged by Barack Obama in his campaigns. Surely no court can legitimately deny Mr. Keyes his "standing"....
It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established. Of course, by "the same rule" he means the criterion was where the child is born -- that is what was the same, but in the U.S. it applied to being a citizen, not a subject. How sad it is for us that we aren't even sure what the qualifications for president are in this country! To me, this is scandalous. I agree that SCOTUS should rule on it. But without a case, it won't. I can only surmise that it was considered too volatile last year, and so out of fear, McCain and the Republicans decided not to do it.
That why I say Jindal is not eligible since his parents were non citizens here on a study visa.
I wish it come up now for Jindal as to shine more light on Obama.
John
Of that list you posted the other night listing those that were Nationals and Citizens, which category/item do you think Obama falls into??
Thanks,
John
Everyone who knows me (which leaves you out) knows that I was rendering an opinion.
They also know that I’ve been offline working on other things.
If I was going to do a analysis, it would be a complete one, and I would never be on here reporting what the CONSENSUS of a group discussion had been.
I would be giving MY complete analysis and findings.
I work alone.
In my OPINION, the timing of this document is suspect. I hope it’s real. But, it comes out right at the peak of an allout, anti-birther blitzkrieg by the media and the alternate media.
I do not have a dog in this hunt. Look elsewhere for verification.
Illegal aiens havbe babies in the US and they are natural born Americans ——
**
Not so.
They are “native born” American citizens, which is also referred to as citizens by statute. Not natural born, which is a special class (which most of us fit into, by the way).
They cannot ever become President, under our Constitution.
Please don’t ask me to quote or link to the source on this. It’s been posted at FR too many times to count.
**
Windflier, what “statute”? The statute that tells you who is a citizen at birth, which is the same as natural born citizen, is this: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1401.html.
You have read it, right? So if you don’t accept this statute, what statute are YOU referring to?
Your opponents can back up what they say with http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1401.html, so you need to back up what you say or concede that you cannot do so.
TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1401
§ 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
(g) if he was born in Kenya.
There is no evidence anywhere that “natural born” means both parents are citizens for a child BORN IN THE U.S.A. to be a natural born citizen.
It is ONLY a child NOT BORN IN THE U.S.A. who must have at least ONE parent who is a U.S. citizen.
Why can’t this be understood — particularly when I keep posting the LAW????
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1401.html
I did not know that. In what way did he not meet the Constitutional requirment?
Not old enough.
http://it-is-an-obama-nation.blogspot.com/2008/11/hope-we-can-believe-in.html
"Historically, California Secretaries of State have exercised their due diligence by reviewing necessary background documents, verifying that the candidates that were submitted by the respective political parties as eligible for the ballot were indeed eligible. In 1968, the Peace and Freedom Party submitted the name of Eldridge Cleaver as a qualified candidate for President of the United States. The then SOS, Mr. Frank Jordan, found that, according to Mr. Cleaver's birth certificate, he was only 34 years old, one year shy of the 35 years of age needed to be on the ballot as a candidate for President. Using his administrative powers, Mr. Jordan removed Mr. Cleaver from the ballot. Mr. Cleaver unsuccessfully challenged this decision to the Supreme Court of the State of California, and, later, to the Supreme Court of the United States."
Two side notes here.
Frank Jordan later became mayor of San Francisco.
Joe Biden ran for his Senate seat as a 29-year-old. He took his seat as a 30 year old (Constitutional requirement). The Sec. of State of Delaware apparently had no problem putting an underage Senate candidate on the ballot.
Gizmos, are you implying that a citizen is not the same as a citizen of the United States?
Maybe because what you’ve posted doesn’t address who is a ‘natural born’ (as opposed to simply native born) citizen? A child born outside of the US needs at least one US citizen parent to be a US citizen at all.
It doesn't do anything to remedy the situation now. The election of a President is an extraordinary event and out of 44 elected Presidents and 2 1/4 centuries we've only been in this situation twice.
I'd rather see effort expended towards legislation enforcing that elected officials have to abide by exactly the same set of rules they lay down for the rest of us. But that's just my personal preference. It was one of the planks in the wildly successful Contract with America, after all.
I believe "natural born" has NOTHING to do with being made a citizen by statute, including any statute that makes a person a "citizen at birth" by being born on American soil. "Citizen at birth" is not the same thing as "natural born citizen."
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.