SCOTUS is COMING!!!!
Posted on 11/14/2008 7:05:09 PM PST by solfour
The California secretary of state should refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office, alleges a California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others.
The legal action today is just the latest is a series of challenges, some of which have gone as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, over the issue of Obama's status as a "natural-born citizen," a requirement set by the U.S. Constitution.
WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi even traveled to Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.
The biggest question is why Obama, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists, simply hasn't ordered it made available to settle the rumors.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Thank you.
I pray that he won’t get away on some minor technicality.
bookmark/bump
How do I find out about this article that’s an old one posted on Barry O that says his b-day is July 18th?
I would love to have this.
Thanks
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/08/barack-obamas-b.html
Proves I shouldn’t just skim an article. That article is about McCain’s birthday. Sorry.................
SCOTUS is COMING!!!!
Indonesian passport travel will not disqualify Zero unless he consciously renounced his citizenship if he was ever a citizen. It would be a fraud against Indonesia not that anyone will care.
The Senate only went through that nonsense because of Obama not McCain. Only a fool would believe that the Democrats would not have waited until he was elected to challenge his eligibility. Or had any sense of justice or fair-play.
How does a complete showpiece without legal effect “settle” any legal point in dispute in any case?
The concept of Natural born was not meant to confine the birth to a geographical region. Check out the authority which the Founders used for legal definitions, concepts etc., Blackstone.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines “Natural Born” as “In English law, one born within the dominions; or rather, the allegiance of the King of England.” This is why children born to officers/subjects of the King (state) are Natural born no matter WHERE they are born. Hence, American citizen’s children are Natural born even if born in Panama or Kenya for that matter.
See the above post as per Natural born.
The first about the Virginia “case” appeared here last week and was based on an AP story. I stopped paying attention after reading it and taking the claim that the judge had made a ruling presumably after seeing documentation.
If you are interested look it up.
As to the inability of the GOP to think outside the box being genetic or cultural tests are still being conducted but I suspect the latter.
“Indonesian passport travel will not disqualify Zero unless he consciously renounced his citizenship if he was ever a citizen.”
Like I said in my post - I haven’t thoroughly checked ...
If you could cite SCOTUS, I would like to see it.
The one SCOTUS ruling I BRIEFLY looked at stated he needed to perform a deed of affirmation AFTER the age of majority.
I am just NOT sure if travelling on a foreign passport qualifies ...
The Constitution is not suspended by the fact the election is over. But actually the election has not even been held.
The ELECTION occurs when the Electoral College meets.
Electors cannot cast a valid vote for an ineligible candidate. Why is Zero allowing this canker to fester?
Why is everything about this guy hidden?
BTW it is a LIE that all politicians hide the basic facts of their history or that you can’t find out anything about Bush. We know HIS college grades, SAT scores etc. We know what he did as Governor, as a businessman, etc. Why would you try such an obvious LIE as this?
Why would determining if Zero is Constitutionally qualfied for the office stop anyone from strengthening conservatism? Obviously it won’t. If we jettison or ignore the Constitution conservatism has no meaning.
“My understanding is that a natural born U.S. citizen means born on U.S. soil. McCain born in Panama of to U.S.citizens means McCain is a U.S. citizen but not a “natural born” U.S. citizen.”
Our system of laws is rooted in English Common Law. And the Founding Fathers followed it, unless there was an explicit deviation. Their concept of “original intent” devolved from it. They took the BEST of English Common Law and threw out the crap.
The definition of “natural born citizen” was NOT thrown out.
Per Blackstone in his Commentaries On English Common Law, a person born overseas to 2 natural born citizens who were in service to the Crown was a natural born citizen (Blackstone, Book 1. Chapter 10). You can look it up ...
BTW: SCOTUS commonly refers to Blackstone when deciding cases with historical roots.
"The framers of the constitution were, of course, well-versed in the British common law, having learned its essential principles from William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England. As such they knew that the very concept of citizenship was unknown in British common law. Blackstone speaks only of "birthright subjectship" or "birthright allegiance" never using the terms citizen or citizenship. The idea of birthright subjectship is derived from feudal law. It is the relation of master and servant; all who are born within the protection of the king owe perpetual allegiance as a "debt of gratitude." According to Blackstone, this debt is "intrinsic" and "cannot be forfeited, canceled, or altered." Birthright subjectship under common law is thus the doctrine of perpetual allegiance.America's Founders rejected this doctrine. The Declaration of Independence, after all, solemnly proclaims that "the good people of these Colonies...are Absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved." According to Blackstone, the common law regards this as "high treason." So the common law--the feudal doctrine of perpetual allegiance--could not possibly serve as the ground of American (i.e. republican) citizenship. Indeed, the idea is too preposterous to entertain!" - Edward J. Erler, Professor of Political Science
I read this to mean that being an American is different than the preceding reality, and that being an American citizen is not something imposed on someone by an accident of birth. It can derive from being born in American to Americans, or it can be earned by the citizenship process. It is an actual right, not an obligation. We even allow people to leave!
The question still lingers: What did the Founding Fathers mean with a restriction unique to holding the office of the president, that of needing to be not just a citizen, but to be a 'natural born' citizen.
I believe that their intent was to exclude anyone with any hint of divided loyalties, specifically including a certain fondness for a place of birth other than on US soil disqualifies.
Right now I believe Leo Donafrio is correct about both McCain and Obama. It is now up to the Supreme Court Justices to review the case and make their decision. We will certainly know more on December 5th. :)
I'm listening to Leo Donofrio live as I compose this reply...
From the US State Dept., Foreign Affairs Manual, Section 7-1116.1-4C:
7 FAM 1116.1-4 Not Included in the Meaning of "In the United States" (TL:CON-64; 11-30-95)
a. A U.S.-registered or documented ship on the high seas or in the exclusive economic zone is not considered to be part of the United States. A child born on such a vessel does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of the place of birth (Lam Mow v. Nagle, 24 F.2d 316 (9th Cir., 1928)).
b. A U.S.-registered aircraft outside U.S. airspace is not considered to be part of U.S. territory. A child born on such an aircraft outside U.S. airspace does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of the place of birth.
c. Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.
http://www.state.gov/m/a/dir/regs/fam/c22712.htm
.
I listened to Leo Donafrio’s interview this evening on the Lan Lamphere program. He said this will be his last intervew until after December 5th when the SC has their conference concerning his case. He will be spending a lot of time preparing for the posibility that he will be called in right after the 5th do present his arguements before the Court.
Lan happened to mention that he was called this afternoon by someone from FOX and they talked to him about coming on a show to talk about his following this case. Lan said he told them he is not interested! He also told him that he is the MSM following Leo Donafrio’s case since NO OTHER MEDIA cared to report the news that MATTERS! Loved it!
Leo will only be talking with Lan Lamphere on December 5th or 6th and will keep his web site up to date when new information comes up.
Will be interested to see who talks about this tomorrow. It is certainly about time!! Even Drudge, Rush,Sean,Mark,Laura are behind on this issue!
Here’s the working link, to one of the reasons, Leo Donofrio is saying that Obama AND McCain, are both ineligible for the Presidency...
US Department of State
Foreign Affairs Manual
http://www.state.gov/m/a/dir/regs/fam/
Section 7-1116.1-4C
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.