The New York State Supreme Court, last month, found the New York Board of Elections guilty of fraud for certifying a British citizen (Barack H. Obama) as eligible to be the 2008 candidate for POTUS.
The MSM hushed that one up and hid it away, didn’t they?
Virtually zero news coverage.
What part of a court has ruled Obama is not eligible is unclear?
The only court case I have found recently that actually ruled on Obama’s eligibility is the Ankeny vs. the governer of Indiana. In it the court stated;
Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by [the US Supreme Court in 1898 in the case of US v] Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States natural-born citizens.”—Indiana Court of Appeals, Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels, Nov. 12, 2009.
They are using the Wong Kim Ark case as precedent. I think the Wong Kim Ark case was decided wrongly and that just because you are born on US Soil should not make you a natural born citizen. However, I don't see the supremes reversing the Wong Kim Ark decision. I think for those of us that believe only someone born of two US citizens on American soil should be eligible for president we will need to push a constitutional amendment.
Do you know where to obtain the judges ruling that found the New York Board of Elections guilty of fraud for certifying a British citizen (Barack H. Obama) as eligible?