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

To: jamese777

“Once again, the courts that have looked at the issue have seen it differently from you:”

They have?

Page 468:

Quote from Minor by Justice Gray in Wong Kim Ark:

” ‘At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens.’ “

Both Minor and Wong Arc Kim were cases defining “citizen.”
Boch recognized the definition of Natural Born Citizen as being born in country to two citizen parents.”...These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

That seems to dispute your contention doesn’t it?


81 posted on 04/30/2010 5:46:35 PM PDT by Forty-Niner ((.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Forty-Niner

Once again, the courts that have looked at the issue have seen it differently from you:”

They have?

Page 468:

Quote from Minor by Justice Gray in Wong Kim Ark:

” ‘At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens.’ “

Both Minor and Wong Arc Kim were cases defining “citizen.”
Boch recognized the definition of Natural Born Citizen as being born in country to two citizen parents.”...These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

That seems to dispute your contention doesn’t it?


However the courts that have ruled SPECFICIALLY on the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama II and the other courts that have dismissed, denied or rejected OBAMA eligibility lawsuits on appeal have taken a different interpretation of those earlier decisions.
For example: “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States natural-born citizens.”—Indiana Court of Appeals, Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels, Nov. 12, 2009

And in US Federal District Court: “This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by Constitution. See U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”—Chief Judge Royce Lamberth in dismissing the Quo Warranto claim in “Taitz v Obama”—April 14, 2010

OBAMA ELIGIBILITY SUITS & STATUS

Allen v. Soetoro: Freedom Of Information Act Arizona District: Filed
Ankeny v. Daniels (and McCain) Indiana State: Dismissed
Indiana Supreme Court: Denied
Barnett v Obama, California Central District: Dismissed
formerly Keyes v Obama et al, 9th US Court of Appeals: Pending
Berg v. Obama et al Fed PA Eastern: Dismissed
3rd Circuit Appeals Appealed Brief FEC
Hearing 26-Oct-2009
Supreme Court Of The United States: Denied
Berg v. Obama Fed DC District: Dismissed
Beverly v FEC, US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit: Dismissed US Supreme Court: Denied
Brockhausen v. Andrade, Texas State: Dismissed
Broe v. Reed Washington State Supreme: Dismissed
The Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Aryan Nations of Missouri et al v. Obama et. al., Dismissed
Cohen v. Obama, DC: Dismissed
Connerat v. Browning, Florida Supreme Court : Dismissed
Connerat v. Obama FL Small Claims: Dismissed
Constitution Party v. Lingle, Hawaii Supreme Court: Dismissed; Reconsideration: Denied
Cook v. Good et al GA Middle: Dismissed
Cook v. Simtech FL Middle: Dismissed
Craig v. US: Judgment in favor of defendant; Dismissal Affirmed, U.S. Supreme Court: Writ Denied 29-Sep-2009
Dawson v. Obama California Eastern District: Dismissed
Donofrio v Wells: NJ State Dismissed; NJ Supreme Court Denied; Supreme Court Of The United States: Denied
Ealey v. Obama TX Houston: Dismissed
Essek v. Obama KY Eastern: Dismissed
Gopalan v Obama III et. al., CA Southern: Dismissed
Greenberg v. Brunner, Ohio Wood County Court: Dismissed
Hamblin v Obama/McCain Arizona District: Dismissed
Herbert v. Obama et al Fed FL Middle: Dismissed
Hollister v. Soetoro, Fed DC: Dismissed
Hunter v. Obama, US District Northern Texas: Dismissed
Jones v. Obama, Federal Court Cal. Central District: Pending
Judy v. McCain, US District Court Nevada North: Dismissed
Kerchner et al v. Obama et al., Federal District Court New Jersey: Dismissed; US Court of Appeals 10th District: Pending
Keyes v. Bowen Superior Court of CA: Dismissed
Keyes v. Lingle, Hawaii state: Dismissed
Lightfoot v. Bowen , Supreme Court Of The United States: Denied
Marquis v. Reed, Washington State Court, King County Superior: Dismissed
Martin v Lingle, HI State: Dismissed’ HI State Appeal: Dismissed
Meroni et al v. McHenry County Grand Jury Foreman et al., Illinois State: Denied
Morrow v. “Barak Humane Obama” Fed FL Miami: Dismissed
Neal v. Brunner, Ohio State Wood County: Dismissed
Neely v. Obama, Fed MI: Dismissed
Patriot Heart’s Network v Soetoro, DC Federal: Denied
Rhodes v. Gates TX West: Denied
Rhodes v. MacDonald GA Middle: Dismissed, Denied Rehearing, Sanctions Imposed
Roy v. Obama Fed HI: Dismissed
Schneller v. Cortes, PA Supreme Court: Denied; Supreme Court of the United States: Dismissed
Spuck v. Secretary of State, Ohio State, Erie County: Dismissed
Stamper v. US: Dismissed
Stumpo v. Granholm, MI State Court 30th Dist. Court (Ingham County): Dismissed
Strunk Fed NY Eastern: Dismissed
Strunk 2nd Circuit: Denied
Strunk v U.S. Department of State, FOIA Fed District of Columbia DC Circuit: Appealed
Sullivan v. Marshall, North Carolina Superior Court: Dismissed
Taitz v Obama, US District DC: Dismissed
Thomas v. Hosemann Fed Dist Hawaii: Dismissed
Terry v. Handel, Georgia State Court Fulton County:Denied
Welch v. Mukasey et al NY Northern District: Dismissed
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz CT State: Dismissed; Supreme Court Of The United States: Denied


84 posted on 04/30/2010 6:09:09 PM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | 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