This is a good point. There’s really nothing to support the idea that the child of a single U.S. citizen mother would be a natural-born citizen in the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, especially the child of a British subject, whether he was a bigamist or not. There’s nothing to indicate that they would have only rejected those persons who were legitimately born to foreign national fathers.
The thing that we need to focus on too, is that this hearing is an administrative law hearing for an elections law issue. Marriage and legitimacy cases are conducted separately and can take all kinds of time to sort out and resolve. This judge is not going to accept weak and speculative claims about Obama’s mama being an unwed mother because Obama’s papa was a bigamist. It just ain’t gonna happen. Instead, I predict that either A) Obama tries to strong-arm the court with a fake birth certificate or out-of-court website evidence, B) Obama bails out and allows a default judgment, or C) His lawyers find a way to delay the case and/or get an injunction and convince a higher court to dismiss the case.
What higher court could they appeal to?
“A) Obama tries to strong-arm the court with a fake birth certificate or out-of-court website evidence, B) Obama bails out and allows a default judgment, or C) His lawyers find a way to delay the case and/or get an injunction and convince a higher court to dismiss the case.”
D) Bombing of Iran starts in five minutes.