Posted on 03/09/2011 1:39:10 PM PST by patlin
During a debate (see pg. 2791) regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen. Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:
“As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.” (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872.)
Notice that Bingham declares Houard to be a “natural-born citizen” by citing two factors – born of citizen parents in the US.
John Bingham, aka “father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins. Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor:
“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))
Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:
“Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested. However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the US) was never challenged on the floor of the House.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s holding in Wong Kim Ark did not address Presidential eligibility, nor did it define “natural born citizen”. It simply clarified who was a “citizen”. Had the framers of the 14th Amendment sought to define nbc, they would have used the words “natural born” in the Amendment. But they didn’t.
Do not allow the opposition to state this definition as “Vattel’s definition”. Challenge that tactic every time. Vattel didn’t make it up. His text on the law of nations compiled known existing law. Vattel was not a legislator.
It is proper to say, with regard to US Constitutional law, that this was the House definition as stated on the floor by Representative Bingham. And this definition was never opposed on the floor. And that is exactly where it should have been opposed if it were not the truth.
Debate upon issues of Constitutional law such as this belong on the House floor. And when an issue this important comes before the nation on the floor of “the people’s House”, and the issue is not challenged by any Representative of the people, then it’s certainly proper to infer that the House of Representatives, as a whole, agreed with that definition. After all, our nation is governed by debate on the floor of the House. But there never was debate on this issue because it was a proper statement of Constitutional law.
The definition of natural born citizen as stated on the House floor = born in the US to parents who are citizens. It’s not like those cats were incapable of correcting each other’s mistakes. Since no Supreme Court case ever stated a different definition of “natural born citizen”, and no Represenative ever challenged Bingham on this point, the House definition stands and officially remains unchallenged as of today. If the House wants to change this definition, let them bring the issue to the floor now and properly debate it.
Until then, call it the House of Representatives definition as offered by the father of the 14th Amendment who was never challenged upon it.
Don’t let history be rewritten by propagandists. The evidence is mounting on a daily basis that the current Commander In Chief is not eligible to hold the office of President. You have a voice. You have freedom of speech. You have access to your federal and state representatives.
The courts don’t want to hear from you.
So find someone who must to listen to you and be heard. The Constitution cannot survive unless you breath life into it. We are responsible to future generations. Do something with that responsibility. Use the law. Obey the law. Respect the law. Fight for the law.
by Leo Donofrio, Esq. (hat tip to my main researcher who shall remain anonymous for now…)
WOW!!!!
What dead souls.
Absolutely blind and dead.
Amazing.
I’m sure he can’t even control his own wind. Somewhere on some threads (insider ones?) it is said that he stinks to be around, literally.
It’s terrifying. It’s like that O.T. passage, in Jeremiah, I think, that compares the desire to sin to a wild donkey in heat. Nothing is going to stop her from seeking her mate. Hanson & co. were determined to pursue this great evil, which they had come to love far more than they loved God and His Word/commandments. Nothing—not even a bolt of lightning—could dissuade them. May such terrifying blindness never overtake any of the rest of us.
I will have to read the book of Jeremiah again, more carefully. That is an interesting analogy. Not even a bolt of lightning. Reminds me of the writing on the wall.
It’s in the second chapter of Jeremiah [New International Version]:
20 “Long ago you broke off your yoke
and tore off your bonds;
you said, ‘I will not serve you!’
Indeed, on every high hill
and under every spreading tree
you lay down as a prostitute.
21 I had planted you like a choice vine
of sound and reliable stock.
How then did you turn against me
into a corrupt, wild vine?
22 Although you wash yourself with soap
and use an abundance of cleansing powder,
the stain of your guilt is still before me,”
declares the Sovereign LORD.
23 “How can you say, ‘I am not defiled;
I have not run after the Baals’?
See how you behaved in the valley;
consider what you have done.
You are a swift she-camel
running here and there,
24 a wild donkey accustomed to the desert,
sniffing the wind in her craving—
in her heat who can restrain her?
Any males that pursue her need not tire themselves;
at mating time they will find her.
25 Do not run until your feet are bare
and your throat is dry.
But you said, ‘It’s no use!
I love foreign gods,
and I must go after them.’
Interesting story. So Lord Haw Haw was of split allegiances. Born in the U.S., and still was a subject to the British crown where the Brits still hanged him for treason from the gallows. This fits nicely with Kawikita V. United States, 1952. Kawikita had spit allegiances or duel citizenship and who was also found of treason against the United States.
There is an object lesson here about these two court cases concerning Obama.
Important, re your link
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=k_E6AAAAIBAJ&sjid=fyoMAAAAIBAJ&pg=1482,13599073&dq=born+subject+to+jurisdiction&;
further info from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_haw_haw
....Joyce was captured by British forces in northern Germany just as the war ended,[17] tried, and eventually hanged for treason on 3 January 1946. Joyce’s defence team, appointed by the court, argued that, as an American citizen and naturalised German, Joyce could not have been convicted of treason against the British Crown. However, the prosecution successfully argued on the basis of a technicality that having lied about his nationality to obtain a British passport and to vote, Joyce owed allegiance to the king....
Significance, should it be found Obama is not an American Citizen, his possesion of a US passport and oath of allegiance to same could still subject him to charges of treason should it be found he is ineligible...
I wonder who wrote that statement for Sheik Hussein?
I wonder who wrote that statement for Sheik Hussein?
New York Times - Jun 15, 1878
But Indians in the tribes will not be deemed born subject to the . Jurisdiction here does not mean
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70A1EFA345F137B93C7A8178ED85F408684F9
A bill to provide for the greater efficiency of the civil service of the United States.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled. That the President be, and he hereby is, authorized to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, a board of examiners, consisting of three commissioners, at salaries of _____ dollars a year. And the commissioners may appoint a clerk to the board, with an annual compensation of $2,000; and these sums, and the necessary expenses of the board, including rent and the traveling expenses of the commissioners and clerk, shall be paid from any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That no person shall be appointed after the date of this act to any civil office under the United States, whether by way of original appointment or promotion, unless recommended by a certificate of the board: Provided, That this shall not apply to offices the appointing power to which is by the Constitution vested in the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate: Provided, however, That applicants for such offices shall be examined by the board, if they present themselves, and shall receive certificates in the same manner as other applicants.
SEC. 3. And be it further enacted. That the board shall hold examinations of applicants, for civil office under the United States, at such places as they may designate, and at times to be determined by consideration of the needs of the service, and the number of vacancies to be filled, after consultation with the President, courts, or heads of department, as the case may be, and after public notice of the time, place, and regulations of proposed examination.
SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That applicants for examination shall be citizens of the United States, (including all persons born in the United States, and not owing allegiance elsewhere,) between the ages or eighteen and twenty-five, and shall furnish such testimonials of personal character, and take such oath of allegiance as the board shall prescribe: and all fees received under the provisions of this act shall be paid by the board into the Treasury of the United States; Provided, That if the examination is for any office, the duties of which are to be performed in any particular State, then the applicant, in addition to the above requirements, shall have resided in such State one year before the time of examination, and in such case the board shall designate a place of examination within such State: Provided, however, That the President may suspend the operation of the preceding proviso as to any States or parts of States where he may deem it expedient so to do.
Thanks for digging this up out of the record!
Great find!
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.