ARE ARIZONA LAWMAKERS NOW TRYING TO COVER FOR 0BAMA’S INELIGIBILITY?
Thanks, STE=Q.
-
Leo Donofrio mentioned this last Friday. Sounds like McCain inside job.
Posted on 02/27/2011 7:26:01 PM PST by STE=Q
Arizona is considering passing a law that, among other things, would allow a child born in the U.S. to one or two alien parents to be recognized as a “natural born Citizen.” Such a law would be passed in error. Apart from the proposed law being unconstitutional for violating the Supremacy Clause and the Pre-emption Doctrine, a law that recognizes an Article II “natural born Citizen” as including a child born in the U.S. to one or two alien parents would be contrary to what the Founders and Framers designed as a national security safeguard for the Offices of President and Commander in Chief of the Military. In this article, I will address only that part of the proposed law that attempts to define what an Article II “natural born Citizen” is and specifically that part of the law that includes as an Article II “natural born Citizen” a child born in the U.S. to one or two alien parents. In a follow up article, I will address the other parts of the proposed law that I will show are also unconstitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Ping!
STE=Q
Nooooo! They’re going the wrong way!
Last I heard Arizona was working on a law that would eliminate "anchor babies" -- children born on US soil of parents who were in country illegally.
They would not issue a birth certificate.
Leo Donofrio mentioned this last Friday. Sounds like McCain inside job. Another corrupt state. People in AZ need to call.
Arizona could pass a law saying babies are pineapples. In a sane world, the legislative branch would never validate a presidential election with one of these babies...oh wait.
Arizona could pass a law saying babies are pineapples. In a sane world, the legislative branch would never validate a presidential election with one of these babies...oh wait.
I was caught off guard by this report.
I had thought AZ was on the right track.
STE=Q
Since the child is already considered natural born if one parent is a US citizen this doesn’t change anything as far as I can see. Urkle was born to an underage citizen and at that time that was not sufficient but the law was later changed which, of course, does not affect him.
ARE ARIZONA LAWMAKERS NOW TRYING TO COVER FOR 0BAMA’S INELIGIBILITY?
Thanks, STE=Q.
-
Leo Donofrio mentioned this last Friday. Sounds like McCain inside job.
The Magic Marxist Mombasa Moonbeam has tied this country in knots. He is counting on Rule Number 1 in the American interracial dialog:
Thou shalt never utter an unpleasant truth to a Negro.
(a) Barry, you are not a Negro.
(b) You are not a white man.
(c)You are neither flesh, nor fowl, nor good red meat. In fact we don't even really really know if you are an American, thanks to your smokescreens.
(d) If your antecedents are appropriate to the office, do let us know, or
(e)GTF out of town.
It was Barry who should have asked for a ruling on Natural Born Citizenship, BEFORE he ran. His father was not a citizen. Never was, never intended to become one. End of story. Born in Hawaii? Gosh! That's nice. Speaking of corrupt states, why is Barry no longer on the Illinois Bar. Can we unseal those records? We know he lied on the app. Come on, it's Illinois. Al Capone's kid was a member of the Bar. I mean you gotta go some to get asked off that outfit.
And now a personal question: Barry what's with the skull scars. I don't need X-Rays, just tell me wtf they are. I knew, against my will really, very inch of Ronald Reagan's colon. Why can't you pull your head out of yours and fill us in on that intriguing aspect of your suppressed medical history?
When this first surfaced I couldn’t believe they’d be so stupid. Only one parent needed to be a US citizen for the kid to be a NBC???@?!@?!
Nonsense and WHY would they do this?
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 36, chapter 3, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding article 6, to read:
ARTICLE 6. INTERSTATE BIRTH CERTIFICATE COMPACT
START_STATUTE36-361. Adoption of compact; text of compact
The governor is authorized and directed to enter into a compact on behalf of this state with any of the United States lawfully joined in the compact in a form substantially as follows:
ARTICLE I
Findings and declaration of policy
It is the purpose of this compact through the joint and cooperative action among the party states to make a distinction in the birth certificates, certifications of live birth or other birth records issued in the party states between a person born in the party state who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and a person who is not born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. A person who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States is a natural born United States citizen.
ARTICLE II
Definition
As used in this compact, "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" has the meaning that it bears in section 1 of the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution, namely that the person is a child of at least one parent who owes no allegiance to any foreign sovereignty, or a child without citizenship or nationality in any foreign country. For the purposes of this compact a person who owes no allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is a United States citizen or national, or an immigrant accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the united states, or a person without nationality in any foreign country.
ARTICLE III
Terms
Notwithstanding any state or federal law to the contrary, each party state shall make a distinction in the birth certificates, certifications of live birth or other birth records issued in the party states, between a person born in the party state who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and a person who is not born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. A person who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States is a natural born United States citizen.
ARTICLE IV
Enforcement
Notwithstanding any state or federal law to the contrary:
1. The governor of each party state shall enforce this agreement and compact.
2. A taxpaying resident of any party state has standing in the courts of any party state to require the governor of any party state to enforce this agreement and compact.
ARTICLE V
Compact administrator and interchange of information
A. The governor of each party state or the governor's designee is the compact administrator. The compact administrator shall:
1. Maintain an accurate list of all party states.
2. Formulate all necessary and proper procedures to effectuate this compact.
3. Delegate needed tasks to other state agencies.
B. The compact administrator of each party state shall furnish to the compact administrator of each party state any information or documents that are reasonably necessary to facilitate the administration of this compact.
ARTICLE VI
Entry into effect and withdrawal
A. This compact is deemed accepted when at least two states deliver a notice of confirmation, which is duly executed by their respective authorized representative and which acknowledges complete agreement to the terms of this compact, to each other's governor, the office of the clerk of the United States house of representatives, the office of the secretary of the United States senate, the president of the United States senate and the speaker of the United States house of representatives. Thereafter, the compact is deemed accepted by any state when a respective notice of confirmation, which is duly executed by the state's respective authorized representative and which acknowledges complete agreement to the terms of this compact, is delivered to each party state's compact administrator, the office of the clerk of the United States house of representatives, the office of the secretary of the United States senate, the president of the United States senate and the speaker of the United States house of representatives.
B. This compact shall not take effect until the United States congress has given its consent pursuant to article I, section 10, clause 3 of the United States Constitution.
C. Four years after this compact first becomes effective, any party state may withdraw from this compact by enacting a joint resolution declaring such withdrawal and delivering notice of the withdrawal to each other party state. A withdrawal does not affect the validity or applicability of the compact to states remaining party to the compact.
ARTICLE VII
Construction and severability
A. This compact shall be liberally construed so as to effectuate its purposes.
B. This compact is intended to operate as the law of the nation with respect to the party states under 4 United States Code section 112, to supersede any inconsistent state and federal law and to establish vested rights in favor of residents of the party states.
C. If any phrase, clause, sentence or provision of this compact is declared in a final judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to the constitution of the United States or is otherwise held invalid, the validity of the remainder of this compact shall not be affected.
D. If the applicability of any phrase, clause, sentence or provision of this compact to any government, agency, person or circumstance is declared in a final judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to the constitution of the United States or is otherwise held invalid, the validity of the remainder of this compact and the applicability of the remainder of this compact to any government, agency, person or circumstance shall not be affected.
E. If this compact is held to be contrary to the constitution of any party state, the compact shall remain in full force and effect as to the remaining party states and in full force and effect as to the affected party state as to all severable matters.END_STATUTE
The stupidity of this article is higlighted by this:
“Arizona’s proposed law would defeat the whole purpose of the Framers using the natural law definition of a “natural born Citizen” as the standard to be met by any would-be President and Commander in Chief. There is good reason why the Framers relied upon natural law to provide the definition of a “natural born Citizen.” Under natural law which when applied to nations become the law of nations, a “natural born Citizen” is defined as “those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations, Section 212 (London 1797) “
Ah, yes....in 1787, the Founders used a phrase found in the 1797 translation of Vattel, and a bad translation at that.
Had the Founders wanted to follow Vattel, they could have written:
No Person except a natural Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President
No Person except a native Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President
No Person except an indigenous Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President
No Person unless born of citizens, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President
But they didn’t write any of those, and instead used a legal term well known to the lawyers of the day - natural born citizen. It was only ignorance of what Vattel actually wrote that led birthers to worship Vattel.
They simply cannot do this.
It’s very much like Obama declaring the DOM act unconstitutional. He doesn’t have the authority to make that determination!!!
Nor does Arizona have the authority to re-define “Natural Born citizen!.... thereby bypassing or “satisfying” the constitution by way of semantics.
“Since the child is already considered natural born if one parent is a US citizen this doesn’t change anything as far as I can see.”
Therefore he — through NATURAL law — inherited dual citizenship, at his birth!
It is my understanding that positive law cannot trump natural law.
STE=Q
“It was only ignorance of what Vattel actually wrote that led birthers to worship Vattel.”
I don’t think birthers to worship Vattel anymore than Ben Franklin did, as follows:
Ben Franklin:
“I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of VATTEL. It came to us in good season when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary FREQUENTLY to CONSULT the LAW OF NATIONS. Accordingly, that copy which I KEPT, (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other to the college of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed) has been CONTINUALLY in the HAND of the MEMBERS of our CONGRESS, now sitting, who are much PLEASED with your notes and preface, and have ENTERTAINED a HIGH and JUST ESTEEM for their author” {Vattel}...
(Emphases mine)
We the underwritten, appointed by the american congress a committee of foreign correspondence having perused the above Letter, Written at our Request, do approve and confirm the same.
(Signed) John Dickinson
John Jay
STE=Q
I think this is a great idea. The state can’t make a law changing the definition of natural born citizen under the Supreme law of the land. This gives anyone standing to challenge this all the way to the supreme court.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.