Appeal of Obama eligibility decision filed yesterday

Coach is Right ^ | 1/17/2012 | Doug Book

[Oldpuppymax]

The Liberty Legal Foundation has filed an appeal with the Georgia Superior Court in the case of Weldon v Obama, one of the three Georgia lawsuits claiming Barack Hussein Obama to be Constitutionally ineligible to serve as president of the United States or to be included on the Georgia ballot. (1)

It is perhaps significant that the very act of filing the appeal was fought by the Superior Court clerk’s office which claimed that an additional $2 fee had not been included with Liberty Legal’s paperwork for the filing of separate motions.

Additionally, the Court Clerk invented numerous excuses to prevent the filing, moving from one to the next whenever it was pointed out by Liberty Legal attorneys that none reflected normal court operating procedure. According to Liberty Legal attorney Van Irion, the clerk’s conduct was, in the course of his entire legal experience, “unheard of.” (2)

As a side note, although the paperwork had been provided some 7 days earlier, the clerk’s office failed to inform Liberty that there was a problem. The clerk simply “sat on the petition” and the filing deadline of TODAY would have been missed had Irion not called to make certain the filing had taken place!

The appeal itself is based upon the claim that the “rights of the appellant [had] been prejudiced because the finding of the Secretary of State (was) affected by…error of law.” (1)

That is, Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who approved Judge Michael Malihi’s Administrative Court decision, had done so in spite of (or due to) mistakes of law made by the Judge in deciding the case.

As Irion states in the appeal, the decision of the Judge “not only violates…

[Harlan1196]

Of course you can make your final argument - is it going to change depending on what I say? Just spit it out - tell us what you want to tell us.

I am not a true prognosticator - just like you I am a layman when it comes to legal issues. But given the legal track history of the legal arguments at hand, it doesn’t require going out on a limb to predict what the result will be.

[Harlan1196]

Are you sure Leo has any character to assassinate?

[philman_36]

...is it going to change depending on what I say?
Answer the question and find out.

Didn’t even Ankeny state that Ark wasn’t a NBC?

[philman_36]

Are you sure Leo has any character to assassinate?
All people do, even you.

And you're doing a fine job of assassinating even your own character.

[rolling_stone]

More constitutional scholarship from our favorite professional poker player?

You do know that Leo has no history of actually being a lawyer before he jumped on the birther gravy train, much less a Constitutional scholar?

try attacking the message not the messenger, thats just a typical liberal tactic, you have show your true colors.

[Harlan1196]

The courts have answered his “message” time and time again.

I have shown my true conservative character by looking at the messenger to see if he has the experience and character I think reflects that of a true conservative constitutional scholar. Don’t you think character counts for something? You are comfortable by Leo’s character? And you are comfortable with his complete lack of legal experience?

[edge919]

The judge(s) would point you to that long section in WKA that detailed the evolution of NBS to NBC. There is a reason that so much of WKA was devoted to that particular subject.

There's no evolution from NBS to NBC. The last time Gray mentions the term NBC in the WKA decision is when he quotes Minor and affirms that Virginia Minor's citizenship was based on having citizen parents. Why do you suppose he did this when it was never specified in Minor that she was born of citizen parents??

Gray's lengthy essay on NBS is to give teeth to the 14th amendment so that it can override an international treaty that otherwise prevented Ark from being a U.S. citizen. He also clearly says that the 14th amendment does NOT define natural-born citizenship:

In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in question, said: "The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens.""

[rolling_stone]

I have shown my true conservative character by looking at the messenger to see if he has the experience and character I think reflects that of a true conservative constitutional scholar. Don’t you think character counts for something? You are comfortable by Leo’s character? And you are comfortable with his complete lack of legal experience?

You have demonstrated your character and I find it hard to believe you were a US Navy Commander when you act so juvenile. You still avoid the question what is wrong with his message? Experience is not the end all, just look at the colleges that had professors that never worked in their fields. You aren't even an attorney and you are questioning someone's legal experience? Excuse me while I barf. .

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2809640/posts

[Harlan1196]

I can recognise competence when I see it. Leo is not competent. By what measure do you think Leo is qualified?

What makes him stand out from the thousands of constitutional lawyers in America? All his cases - nope. All his books and articles - nope. His teaching experience at law school - nope again.

Do you really have to be a lawyer to know he is not a law expert? Don’t you have to have experience to gain expertise?

[rolling_stone]

so you never even read the link I posted to Leo's criticism of ARK etc...next you will tell me Apuzzo doesn't know law, he's an ambulance chaser.This from a guy who didn't know Louisiana used Napoleonic law...sheesh rocks and shoals, you have run aground.

[Harlan1196]

I read it - not like it’s new. Leo has never got it right before. If.you want a.good.legal.critique of Leo , just read every judge’s decision for all his losing cases.

And I posted yesterday that Louisiana was the only state that was nor.a.common law state. To bad Obama’s eligibility will be decided in the Federal.courts.

[Absolutely Nobama]

I wonder what “bud” he was smoking in Texas......

Anyhoo, adios Obamabot!

[DiogenesLamp]

A reception statute is a statutory law adopted as a former British colony becomes independent, by which the new nation adopts (i.e. receives) pre-independence English law, to the extent not explicitly rejected by the legislative body or constitution of the new nation. Reception statutes generally consider the English common law dating prior to independence, and the precedents originating from it, as the default law, because of the importance of using an extensive and predictable body of law to govern the conduct of citizens and businesses in a new state. All U.S. states, except Louisiana, have either implemented reception statutes or adopted the common law by judicial opinion.

Very good. Now let me point out to you the SALIENT aspect of what you have posted.

Virginia, Va. Code §§ 1-200, 1-201, www.state.va.us/cmsportal3/government_4096/codes_and_laws.html § 1-200. The common law. The common law of England, insofar as it is not repugnant to the principles of the Bill of Rights and Constitution of this Commonwealth, shall continue in full force within the same, and be the rule of decision, except as altered by the General Assembly.

Since jus soli definition of subjectude is explicitly based on Monarchical law, it was thrown out with the rest of Anti-Republican Doctrines contained in English Common Law, and repudiated further by this Nation's behavior and casus belli in the War of 1812. Again, I direct you to what James Madison had to say about this:

The great mass of suits in every State lie between Citizen & Citizen, and relate to matters not of federal cognizance. . . . What can he mean by saying that the Common law is not secured by the new constitution, though it has been adopted by the State Constitutions. The common law is nothing more than the unwritten law, and is left by all the constitutions equally liable to legislative alterations. I am not sure that any notice is particularly taken of it in the Constitutions of the States. If there is, nothing more is provided than a general declaration that it shall continue along with other branches of law to be in force till legally changed. The constitution of Virga. drawn up by Col Mason himself, is absolutely silent on the subject. An ordinance passed during the same Session, declared the Common law as heretofore & all Statutes of prior date to the 4 of James I. to be still the law of the land, merely to obviate pretexts that the separation from G. Britain threw us into a State of nature, and abolished all civil rights and Obligations. Since the Revolution every State has made great inroads & with great propriety in many instances on this monarchical code. The "revisal of the laws" by a Committe[e] of wch. Col. Mason was a member, though not an acting one, abounds with such innovations. The abolition of the right of primogeniture, which I am sure Col. Mason does not disapprove, falls under this head. What could the Convention have done? If they had in general terms declared the Common law to be in force, they would have broken in upon the legal Code of every State in the most material points: they wd. have done more, they would have brought over from G.B. a thousand heterogeneous & antirepublican doctrines, and even the ecclesiastical Hierarchy itself, for that is a part of the Common law. If they had undertaken a discrimination, they must have formed a digest of laws, instead of a Constitution.

For evidence that jus soli was SPECIFICALLY REJECTED as establishing one's citizenship during this period, I direct you to this Newspaper article from 1811, ostensibly written by James Madison himself.

You may not realize this, but during this period of history, the United States was STILL dealing with British Loyalists who remained in the United States. They regarded themselves as British Subjects, and so did the United States government. They didn't become Americans just because they were born here. Allegiance was the issue, and if they didn't have it, they weren't considered American.

Here is a link to the ENTIRE PAGE of that 1811 Newspaper.

[Harlan1196]

Having spend all this time establishing that America is a common law country, newspaper articles and such are meaningless. We have to look to case law - which you do.not.have.

[DiogenesLamp]

Having spend all this time establishing that America is a common law country, newspaper articles and such are meaningless.

The very fact of their existence disproves your contention that the law was as you say. I'm sorry if you cannot comprehend this. No one would have written such an article if the law were as you claim. Especially not James Madison. (PUBLIUS)

We have to look to case law - which you do.not.have.

Yes I do, but I don't regard it as primary evidence. Case law is merely judges opinions, not founders opinions. It is the people who CREATE the laws which determine the INTENT of the law. When courts do it it is called "legislating from the bench.

[SvenMagnussen]

“2. Indonesian school registration form showing he was born in Hawaii (Taitz)”

The Indonesian school record says Barry Soetoro was born in Honolulu, HI. If Obama had shown up for trial, the evidence could have been clarified.

Plaintiff’s counsel to witness Obama:

Who is Barry Soetoro?

Does Barry Soetoro have a COLB on file with the Hawai’i DoH?

If it’s possible for Barry Soetoro to be a citizen at birth due to his birth in Hawai’i, then how can Barry Soetoro be an Indonesian National in the 2nd grade when we know parents cannot renounce the U.S. citizenship of their children?

Why was Barry Soetoro allowed to renounce his citizenship at birth status to become an Indonesian National and Barack Hussein Obama II was not?

Who is Soebarkah?

Have you ever been issued a passport from the country of Indonesia?

[TheOldLady]

Please note that all donations
at this point will go to update
Free Republic's computer system
We have the need for SPEED before the election!


Donate Just One Monthly
And Become a FR Hero

Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up