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

To: SatinDoll

I am well aware that you don’t understand what the Minor Case says, having read your posts before. Feel free to keep spreading your urban legends all you want, and I’ll stick to the truth. The Minor Case isn’t very long, and I invite people to read the entire opinion (not just a single sentence taken out of context).

I’ll make you a deal—get a court to remove Obama from office because his father was not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born, and I’ll accept that your fringe theory, after having been refected for two centuries, finally has become the prevalent interpretation of the NBC Clause, and then I’d be willing to rule Rubio out as a presidential candidate. But I don’t think we should disarm unilaterally, particularly based on a legal theory that no one takes seriously.


34 posted on 02/16/2013 7:14:49 PM PST by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll defend your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: AuH2ORepublican; SatinDoll; AJFavish; ml/nj; GregNH; Ladysforest; Seizethecarp; bgill; LucyT; ...
I’ll make you a deal—get a court to remove Obama from office because his father was not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born, and I’ll accept that your fringe theory, after having been rejected for two centuries, finally has become the prevalent interpretation of the NBC Clause, and then I’d be willing to rule Rubio out as a presidential candidate.

This is an era of many gutless federal courts, so I would sadly and reluctantly agree with you, AuH2ORepublican, that no court likely will "remove Obama from office because his father was not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born."

However, that is a different question than the one of the definition of "Natural Born Citizen." Contrary to your post, there is no new "prevalent interpretation of the NBC clause" (except perhaps by the leftist MSM). In all the cases litigated regarding Obama's constitutional qualifications for the presidency or lack thereof, federal courts have never had to reach the definition of "Natural Born Citizen" in order to dispose of these challenges. Rather, they have dismissed the constitutional challenges to Obama by ruling that the plaintiffs in these cases lacked standing. How convenient on their part, telling the plaintiffs, in essence: "Get out of my courtroom, who are you to challenge the legitimacy of the new Messiah?"

35 posted on 02/17/2013 3:15:13 PM PST by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

To: AuH2ORepublican

“...get a court to remove Obama from office...”

Don’t be silly. No court has the Constitutional power to remove a sitting President.

Only Congress has the power to remove a President. The House of Representatives brings him up on charges of Impeachment, and the Senate tries him for those crimes.

Right now, at this moment, BHO2 has committed treason numerous times. It should be done, but no one has the stones to do it.

Follow the money, as the saying goes.


36 posted on 02/17/2013 3:23:49 PM PST by SatinDoll (NATURAL BORN CITZEN: BORN IN THE USA OF CITIZEN PARENTS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | 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