Posted on 08/14/2009 4:20:53 PM PDT by South40
Orly Taitz, the Mission Viejo lawyer trying to get Barack Obama thrown out of office, says she's had enough of two of her clients in the case and will continue without them.
Whoa, say the two.
"This is our case," said Buena Park Pastor Wiley Drake, one of the two plaintiffs Taitz has unilaterally tried to have removed from the case.
The lawsuit challenges Obama's birthplace and his legitimacy as president. The latest chapter in the drama started when Drake and Markham G. Robinson notified Taitz that they were replacing her as counsel. Taitz continues to represent 40 other plaintiffs in the federal case filed in Santa Ana.
Drake complained that Taitz's paperwork errors have delayed proceedings.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
“Both Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Hoover had one parent who was born in another country and was a citizen of that country. there are four other Presidents with foreign parents but I chose the two 20th Century examples. Your contention is wrong.”
No it is you that is incorrect. Both Wilson and Hoover’s foreign “mothers” were granted naturalized status:
WOODROW WILSON
Born December 28, 1856 – the 28th President, born in Staunton, Virginia.
Wilson’s mother was from Carlisle, England. His father was a US citizen from Ohio. Wilson’s mother gained US citizenship when she married his father according to a congressional Act of February 1855, which stated,
“any woman who might lawfully be naturalized under existing laws, married, or shall be married to a citizen of the United States, shall be deemed and taken to be a citizen.” [Act of February 10, 1855, 10 Stat. 604, section 2]
This was called derivative citizenship. This act was enacted in 1855. Woodrow Wilson was born in December 1856. He was born in the US, both parents were US citizens – natural born citizen.
HERBERT HOOVER
Hoover was born in Iowa, 1874. He was the 31st President. His father Jesse was from Ohio, a US citizen. His mother Hulda Minthorn was from Ontario, Canada. They were married in 1870. According to the 1855 act, which was in effect until 1922, Hoover’s mother became a US citizen automatically when she married Jesse.
So, Hoover was born in the US, both parents were citizens – natural born citizen.
The fact that Janet E. Woodrow was born in England and Hulda Randall Minthorn Hoover was born in Canada is immaterial.
It is the father's citizenship that matters.
The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
Law of Nations § 212. Citizens and natives.
-----
The Kenyan Constitution also declares Obama to share the citizenship of his father..... even if Zero WAS born in Hawaii
Chapter 6 - Citizenship - Section 87
Persons who became citizens on 12th December, 1963
1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on llth December. 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963: Provided that a person shall not become a citizen of Kenya by virtue of this subsection if neither of his parents was born in Kenya.
2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya is on llth December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall,if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), becomes a citizen of Kenya on 12th December. 1963.
-----
Both Zero and his father became Kenyan citizens on the same day.....December 12, 1963.
She is making the issue out to be a joke unfortunately. Not a good spokeswoman for the movement.
They recently found Arthurs father naturalization documents, he was naturalized after Arthur was born even though Arthur like Sun Yat Sen changed his birthdate..hmmm changed birthdate..hmmm
You’re thinking Obama just turned the big five-oh, assuming his known birth date is correct? That would make his Hawaiian, birth-related vital records authentic, Hawaiian and absolutely damning, since he would have been born in a territory and not a state, as was Barry Goldwater, who experienced controversy as a candidate for the very same thing.
Add to that, that Hawaii was British, prior to US control, combined with British citizenship at birth.
Bzzzt ... ineligible.
I’ve noticed, on other UKC (United Kingdom and Colonies) birth documents, from Rhodesia, that racial categorization by continent is the norm, ie European for white.
I’m assuming this ties in somewhere, a British colonial categorization of race.
obumpa
.
Dr. Orly storms Israel:
Go Lady Liberty!!
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132880
______________________________
Canada Free Press
JB Williams
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999
(snip)
Every member of the Supreme Court, every member of congress, every member of the Joint Chiefs, most members of the DOD, CIA, FBI, Secret Service and state run media, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, MSNBC, Fox and print news, knows that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II – Section I constitutional requirements for the office he holds. By his own biography, there is NO way he can pass the test. The hard evidence is so far beyond overwhelming, it is ridiculous.
(snip)
But not ONE member of America’s most powerful people will dare confront Obama and his anti-American cabal on the subject. The Constitution does NOT stand.
(snip)
Half of the people you expect to stop this insanity are quiet co-conspirators in the silent coup. The other half is paralyzed by fear, motivated only by political self-preservation.
(Snip)
Americans keep asking what they can do because they see that none of their leaders are doing anything to stop the demise of their beloved country. It’s the right question, because those leaders are NOT going to stop this thing.
(Snip)
WHO WILL SAVE FREEDOM?
A brave few… This is how it was in the beginning, how it has always been and how it will be.
(Snip)
DR. ORLY TAITZ, Phil Berg and Gary Kreep, ALL OF WHOM HAVE MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP.
(Snip)
A PRECIOUS FEW, BUT THEY EXIST… and the walls are indeed closing in on Obama and his evil cabal. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FAIL TO GET BEHIND THESE BRAVE FEW WHO ARE SEEKING PEACEFUL REDRESS, ALL THE PEACEFUL OPTIONS WILL EVAPORATE AS IF THEY NEVER EXISTED. WE WILL RETURN TO A PRE-1776 AMERICA OVERNIGHT..
Do YOU fear Obama?
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999
___________________________________
A precious few, indeed. Lets get behind those few brave patriots who are out there in the trenches every day working to prove Obama’s inelgibility:
Dr. Orly is the ONLY one out there in the trenches EVERY day hitting Obama on multiple fronts and trying to bring him down. It is reported that she is more than $8,000 in debt from using her own funds for expenses in her flights across the U.S for interviews, speeches, serving papers and meeting with officials!
Dr. Orly’s official website:
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/
Or Dr. Orly’s blog:
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/
.
Sounds fishy@gov.com
Hawaii was annexed by the US in 1893 and became a territory on that date. Also, on that date, all persons born in the new territory automatically became citizens of the USA. I was born in 1938 and have always been a citizen.
In 1959, Hawaii was granted statehood. Obama was born in 1961.
Regardless whether he was born in Hawaii or not (I have doubts) is, I believe, irrelevant since his father was a British subject at the time and his mother was a minor. This alone would make Obama inelligible. I don’t see how he can get around that . . .tnx
My contention is, that it is not being contested. The actual definition is both parents US citizens. Obama fails this test. Other Presidents may have the same issue, but were not contested. Is that relevant to Obama’s qualifications?
You quote foreign law. When did these foreign laws replace our Constitution?
Naturalization does nothing but convey to the person all the benefits of a natural born citizen (exept eligibility to become POTUS). It does not and cannot change the facts of one's birthplace.
If you disagree then please cite the US law that defines naturalized as natural born.
______________________________________
Absolute nonsense. Please cite the US law(s) that define natural born citizen as requiring that both parents must also be US citizens.
You can't because it doesn't exist.
_________________________________________
Ridiculous. Your argument has a foreign nation claiming citizenship two years after birth.
.
Dr. Orly effectively spreads the word in Israel:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132880
.
No one is questioning your citizenship by virtue of having been born in the US territory of Hawaii, keikialii.
Your status as a Constitutional natural born citizen, however, and therefore your eligibility to the one, and only one, elected office that requires such status, that of President, is at question, though. Witness the contention over Barry Goldwater's eligibility back in 1964, due to having been born in Arizona, when Arizona was a territory and not yet a state. And, so would be Obama's eligibility further in question, if his age has been stated incorrectly, in order to avoid the obvious legal problem.
I do not know, and nobody really knows, what the facts of the matter actually are, since the source documents driving the database that generates the controversial "short form" birth document in the state of Hawaii, have not been made available.
I agree with you completely, that having been born to an alien and British citizen disqualifies Obama, on its face. But, efforts to muddy the waters have been afoot, by claiming authentic records of an Hawaiian birth. If indeed such records are authentic, but prior to Statehood, then that canard falls by the wayside, too.
That's why I commented as I did, upthread. Such comments remain speculation, though, and ultimately don't matter under the Constitution, since Obama does not qualify by his own admission, and by the cirumstance of his birth to an alien father. But, it certainly would be helpful, in making the case of ineligibility.;
Welcome to Free Republic, by the way. Did my little remark prompt you to sign up, all by it's little old self, lol? That Google spider sure is fast.
One quick question, pertaining to the odd, and apparently British colonial racial categorization, on the "short form" shown widely on various websites: does your territorial, Hawaiian birth documentation categorize you similarly, in a manner that sounds odd to modern, US ears?
Thanks in advance for your reply.
That is an excellent video, explaining the situation clearly, amazing when you don’t have an antagonizing biased reporter interviewing someone, the true story can be heard. I am not the biggest fan of Orly, I admire her drive and tenacity but not necessarily her legal skills, but I do hope her doubters take a look at the video and pass it around. Thanks for posting that, hammer meet nail.
All that is necessary to transmit natural born citizenship to a child born on US soil, is that parents be citizens, whether that citizenship is acquired via statute or naturalization, or any other legitimate means one might envision.
So, what are you talking about? All those Presidents' parents you listed were technically naturalized, according to the power enumerated to Congress. Derivative citizenship, which was the law at the time, is de jure naturalization of female spouses, who legally took on the citizenship of their husbands.
Look into the Supreme Court's relevant findings, in Perkins v. Elg, for further information on this sort of thing. Miss Elg was found to be a natural born citizen, having been born in the United States, to two citizen parents, under the law in 1907, wherein her mother derived her citizenship from her husband, who was a naturalized US citizen and legal father of Miss Elg.
... and you can't because the Constitution does not allow the Legislature to determine any such matter outside of naturalization, as per power enumerated in Article I, Section 8.
The meaning of such Constitutional terms are evident in the writing. Such terms are known as a "term of art," with specific, legal meaning. That specific, legal meaning is determined by the understanding of the writers, "Framers" of the Constitution itself.
The term natural born citizen was inserted at the behest of John Jay, who became the very first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. His understanding, and the understanding of Marshall, Waite, et al, who came after him, are all within such understanding, that in order to be a natural born citizen, under the Constitution, which is the only means of making any distinction (Osborn v. Bank Of The U.S.), one must be born of citizen parents (plural) on US soil.
That foreign nation, a new one, Kenya, claimed all born in the prior UKC entity that became Kenya, as Kenyan. Obama and his father were both British citizens under The British Nationality Act Of 1948. Subsequent, Kenyan claims derive from having been a British colony.
This is no different from "alienage" eventually agreed upon, between the British and the United States, after our successful revolt and breakaway.
It's valid under international law and precedent, which was first outlined in full by The Law Of Nations, Vattel, Emmerich de, 1758.
And so, we come full circle, back to the inspiration for John Jay, to whose credit the term natural born citizen was inserted into our Constitution. John Jay cited Vattel numerous times, both before ratification, and after, as Chief Justice of 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.