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

To: SatinDoll

Only Congress can remove a President, not SCOTUS. Attorneys are wasting their time in the courts. When Congress has had enough of the incompetent, bumbling, community organizer in the White House, they’ll remove him from office. If not, the voters will do so. Obama keeps violating the Constitution and refusing to uphold laws, both impeachable offenses.

The U.S.Constitution can be amended; well, duh!

I know what Virgina Minor wanted, thank you very much. But Supreme Courts often take on cases and make surprising determinations no one anticipated.

The first should have been expected, as Virginia Minor wasn’t a citizen under the 14th Amendment. She was born in the United States of citizen (2) parents, so she was a natural born citizen as that Supreme Court determined.

Further, SCOTUS determined that the U.S.Constitution doesn’t state whether men or women have the right to vote, which set the stage for the 15th and 19th Amendments.

“...Minor was the first case to hold that women are equal citizens to men. To this day, that case is still cited as the first US Supreme Court decision which recognized that women were, in fact, citizens. It is still precedent for that determination. Google [”minor v happersett” “women are citizens”] and review the results. A multitude of articles discuss the holding of Minor – that women are US citizens.”

“But most important is the case itself. The official syllabus written by the US Supreme Court states:”

“1. The word “citizen ” is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation.”

“2. In that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United states, as much so before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution as since.”

“That’s a direct holding of the case. Hence, it is stated at the the top of the syllabus.”

“It is incorrect to state that Mrs. Minor lost the case entirely. This is not true. The US Supreme Court did not hold that the Constitution granted voting rights to men while denying such rights to women. The Court in Minor held that the Constitution did not grant anybody a right to vote, man or woman.”

“But in doing so, the US Supreme Court first had to determine if Mrs. Minor was a US citizen. The Court’s holding states that she was a US citizen because she was born in the US to parents who were citizens.”

“The Court also held that the Constitution did not grant anyone a right to vote. So, our country chose to amend the Constitution by the 19th Amendment and thereafter all citizens were directly granted a right to vote by the Constitution.”

“But the Court in Minor did make a direct holding that Mrs. Minor was, in fact, a US citizen. The Court established her citizenship by defining the “class” of “natural-born citizens” as those born in the US to parents who were citizens. Then the Court included Virginia Minor in that class thereby deeming her to be a US citizen. AND THEY DID THIS BY SPECIFICALLY AVOIDING THE 14TH AMENDMENT AND BY SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUING ARTICLE 2, SECTION 1.” [Capitalized emphasis mine,]

Per: MINOR V. HAPPERSETT IS BINDING PRECEDENT AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEFINITION OF A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/minor-v-happersett-is-binding-precedent-as-to-the-constitutional-definition-of-a-natural-born-citizen/


I see. So from your perspective, there has been a tremendous amount of wasted effort attacking Obama’s eligibility through the judicial branch when it is the legislative branch that must act in order to effect change.
Now I understand why the Supreme Court has failed to accept any of the Obama eligibility appeals that have already applied for hearings.

Do you think that the Senate’s conservative Republicans will be able to get 20 Democratic Senators to go along with the Senate RINOs and “moderates” to get to the 67 votes needed to find Obama guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors?


160 posted on 07/03/2011 4:34:25 PM PDT by jh4freedom (Mr. "O" has got to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies ]


To: jh4freedom

It’s all politics.

How effective are outraged citizens when they go banging on Congress because the President is violating the very Constitution he took an oath to uphold? Does Congress listen?

Congress ignored Americans when they screamed “NO” about Obama’s Healthcare legislation: many were voted out of office last year as a result. That left a Hell of a mark.

Now, even worse, Obama has made economic decisions that are dragging the nation down economically and refusing to uphold laws with which he doesn’t agree. That last is definitely an impeachable offense.

Will he be impeached? Tried and thrown out of office? I suspect there may well be an impeachment, but the Democratic Party will force him to resign rather than see the Party decimated as the result of a trial in the Senate. Obama is hiding much of his past; the Democrats don’t want the truth publicly outed for it will destroy the Party.

The Obamas already has a bolt hole: he spent over $20Million dollars of OUR money to help Kenya rewrite their national constitution. In the process, it was rewritten so Obama is now eligible to run for President of Kenya.

Rumors from staff at the White House indicate that the Obamas have overseas bank accounts. Gee, what a surprise!


161 posted on 07/03/2011 5:44:00 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | 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