Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: BladeBryan
There is also this...
It is an excerpt from one of the best-researched essays on the topic of the office of President and “Natural Born Citizen” qualification, written by Charles Gordon titled “Who Can Be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma”.

It doesn't have your snippet either so I'm wondering what/where your source is.

162 posted on 06/22/2011 4:10:17 AM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]


To: philman_36

After much searching I finally found it! I wish someone had included the link. It was referenced many many times with NO LINK!

http://www.law.umaryland.edu/academics/journals/mdlr/print/#archive

28 1968

PDF download, starts on page 11


192 posted on 06/22/2011 11:28:39 AM PDT by faucetman (Just the facts ma'am, just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]

To: philman_36

philman_36 wrote: “It doesn’t have your snippet either so I’m wondering what/where your source is.”

My source is what I cited: Charles Gordon, Who Can Be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma, 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, 19 (1968). The “28 Md. L. Rev” bit means the 28’th volume of the Maryland Law Review. I downloaded it from the Maryland Law Review’s slow web site: http://www.law.umaryland.edu/academics/journals/mdlr/print/articles/mllr28.pdf

philman_36 wrote: “By the by...do you have anything more than just that small snippet of Gordon’s. I see you’ve posted it several times so I’m assuming you have something more substantial than just that.”

I recommend the whole paper as recent ‘birther’ suits proved Gordon remarkably prescient on how edibility might be challenged and the likely outcomes. For example, considering federal suits challenging eligibility: “In the first place, a person seeking to launch such a contest would have to overcome the seemingly insuperable hurdle of legal standing to sue. In the federal practice his lack of direct interest would seem fatal.”

Moreover, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California recommended readers see Gordon’s paper, in the Court’s opinion dismissing an eligibility suit, Barnett v. Obama.

The papers by Gordon and Pryor focus on the eligibility of foreign-born citizens from birth, because that was the question in doubt. They note that the eligibility of the native-born was already clear and settled, and there is no record of anyone disagreeing with those notes until people wanted to deny Obama’s eligibility.

One more thing, philman_36: One of your linked citation claimed that Gordon’s article, “was published in 1968, during the time when then Gov. George Romney of Michigan ran for the 1968 Republican Party nomination for President.” Close, but not true. Gordon’s paper notes that Romney had already dropped out. No particular candidate was at issue when Gordon or Pryor published their papers. They wrote on principle, not to benefit nor harm any particular candidate, and not a single ‘birther’ can honestly make the same claim. If I’m wrong on that, please cite one birther speaking up before 2008 on the insufficiency of native-born citizenship.


240 posted on 06/23/2011 4:54:05 AM PDT by BladeBryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson