Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thomas Breaks Tradition: Forces Supreme Court to Look at Obama Citizenship Case
THE AFRO-AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS ^ | 12/3/08 | James Wright, AFRO Staff Reporter

Posted on 12/03/2008 11:43:31 PM PST by BP2

 
U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
By James Wright
AFRO Staff Writer

(December 3, 2008) - In a highly unusual move, U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has asked his colleagues on the court to consider the request of an East Brunswick, N.J. attorney who has filed a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama’s status as a United States citizen.

Thomas’s action took place after Justice David Souter had rejected a petition known as an application for a stay of writ of certiorari that asked the court to prevent the meeting of the Electoral College on Dec. 15, which will certify Obama as the 44th president of the United States and its first African-American president.

The court has scheduled a Dec. 5 conference on the writ -- just 10 days before the Electoral College meets.

The high court’s only African American is bringing the matter to his colleagues as a result of the writ that was filed by attorney Leo Donofrio. Donofrio sued the New Jersey Secretary of State Nina Wells, contending that Obama was not qualified to be on the state’s presidential ballot because of Donofrio’s own questions about Obama citizenship.

Donofrio is a retired lawyer who identifies himself as a “citizen’s advocate.” The AFRO learned that he is a contributor to naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com, a Web site that raises questions about Obama’s citizenship.

Calls made to Donofrio’s residence were not returned to the AFRO by press time.

Donofrio is questioning Obama’s citizenship because the former Illinois senator, whose mom was from Kansas, was born in Hawaii and his father was a Kenyan national. Therefore, Donofrio argues, Obama’s dual citizenship does not make Obama “a natural born citizen” as required by Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution, which states:

“No person except a natural born 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…”

...to prevent the meeting of the Electoral College on Dec. 15, which
will certify Obama as the 44th president of the United States...

Donofrio had initially tried to remove the names not only of Obama, but also the names of Republican Party presidential nominee John McCain and Socialist Workers’ Party Roger Calero from appearing on the Nov. 4 general election ballot in his home state of New Jersey.

McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone when it was a U.S. possession. Calero would be ineligible to be president because he was born in Nicaragua.
After his efforts were unsuccessful in the New Jersey court system, he decided to take his case to a higher level.

On Nov. 6, Souter denied the stay. Donofrio, following the rules of the procedure for the Supreme Court, re-submitted the application as an emergency stay in accordance to Rule 22, which states, in part, that an emergency stay can be given to another justice, which is the choice of the petitioner.

Donofrio’s choice was Thomas. He submitted the emergency stay to Thomas’s office on Nov. 14.  Thomas accepted the application on Nov. 19 and on that day, submitted it for consideration by his eight colleagues - known as a conference - and scheduled it for Dec. 5.

On Nov. 26, a supplemental brief was filed by Donofrio to the clerk’s office of the Supreme Court. A letter to the court explaining the reason for the emergency stay was filed on Dec. 1 at the clerk’s office.

Thomas’s actions were rare because, by custom, when a justice rejects a petition from his own circuit, the matter is dead. Even if, as can be the case under Rule 22, the matter can be submitted to another justice for consideration, that justice out of respect, will reject it also, said Trevor Morrison, a professor of law at Columbia University School of Law.

Morrison said that Thomas’s actions are once in a decade.  “When that does happen, the case has to be of an extraordinary nature and this does not fit that circumstance,” he said. “My guess would be that Thomas accepted the case so it would go before the conference where it will likely be denied. If Thomas denied the petition, then Donofrio would be free to go to the other justices for their consideration.  

“This way, I would guess, the matter would be done with.  Petitions of Donofrio’s types are hardly ever granted.”

Traditionally, justices do not respond to media queries, according to a spokesman from the Supreme Court Public Information Office.

Thomas was appointed to the Supreme Court by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 and has been one of its most conservative members.

Before his ascension to the court, he was appointed by Bush to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Earlier, he served as chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - appointed by President Reagan - and worked various jobs under former Republican Sen. John Danforth.

It would take a simple majority of five justices to put Donofrio’s emergency stay on the oral argument docket. Because it is an emergency by design, the argument would take place within days.

Donofrio wants the court to order the Electoral College to postpone its Dec. 15 proceedings until it rules on the Obama citizenship. He is using the 2000 case Bush vs. Gore case as precedent, arguing that it is of such compelling national interest that it should be given priority over other cases on the court’s docket.

“The same conditions apply here,” Donofrio said in his letter to the court, “as the clock is ticking down to Dec. 15, the day for the Electoral College to meet.”

Audrey Singer, a senior fellow at Washington’s Brookings Institution, who is an expert on immigration, said that the Donofrio matter is “going nowhere.”

“There is no way that anyone can argue about whether Barack Obama is a citizen,” Singer said. “In this country, we have a system known as jus soli or birthright by citizenship. You are a citizen by being born on American soil and he (Obama) was born in Hawaii.”

Singer said that Donofrio’s argument that Obama’s father was a Kenyan national does not matter because citizenship is not based on parentage, but on where someone was born.

“This is the issue that some people have with illegal aliens in our country,” she said. “Children of illegal aliens, if they are born in the United States, are U.S. citizens. That is in the U.S. Constitution.”

 



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bho2008; birthcertificate; case; certifigate; constitution; court; lawsuit; naturalborncitizen; notthisshiitagain; obama; obamatransitionfile; obamatruthfile; president; scotus; supreme; supremecourt; take; talkradioignores; tinfoil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 921-922 next last
To: aruanan

Interesting story. I once visted an old dilapidated house in Port Arthur which housed FIVE families of Vietnamese. They were saving their money to 1) pay cash for houses (they hate interest!) and 2) send their kids to school.

Every single one of those kids wound up in life sciences (medicine), engineering, or computer science.


121 posted on 12/04/2008 4:34:36 AM PST by slnk_rules (http://mises.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: SueRae
Might make Obama the "false prophet" and Pelosi the Anti-Christ, a fact which I am perfectly ready to believe.
122 posted on 12/04/2008 4:34:57 AM PST by 50sDad (-/\/\/\- Obama's coming; be a Resistor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: calenel

“How does this contradict my position? If you look at the first clause “All persons born or naturalized in the United States” it describes two, and only two types of citizen: born or naturalized. Where is this apocryphal ‘born a citizen but not natural born’ type? Where is the redefinition of ‘natural born’ that means something other than ‘having [that] attribute from birth’? Regarding the second clause,”

I’m not going to do your research for you. Go read what our founding fathers had to say about this clause and then get back to me. You obviously are having trouble figuring out the meaning by reading the Constitution itself. I can’t help you, or should I say I won’t help you. Now don’t be lazy about doing the research. You asked the question, you research it to figure out the answer if you need more proof. Will be looking forward to hearing the results of your research.


123 posted on 12/04/2008 4:39:23 AM PST by flaglady47 (Four years of captivity, no relief in sight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“Is that why he never raised the issue during the campaign???”

I thought that from the beginning and said so.


124 posted on 12/04/2008 4:39:23 AM PST by GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: 50sDad

Pelosi does not have the brains to be the AntiChrist. You are giving her way too much credit.


125 posted on 12/04/2008 4:40:46 AM PST by DooDahhhh (AMEN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: calenel

The discussion on the merits of the case is interesting. More interesting, however, is that this is a fairly accurate presentation of the issues and the Donofrio case.

And, it is on the FRONT page of this website!!

I wonder how many people read this site.


126 posted on 12/04/2008 4:46:09 AM PST by koraz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: calenel

I agree. Does any aspect of Donofrio’s case even challenge the actual location/country of Obama’s birth? If not, then it’s even a greater longshot.


127 posted on 12/04/2008 4:51:42 AM PST by motoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

“By the way, this case cannot win. I’m pretty sure...”

I can’t believe you put these two thoughts back to back. Either you know or you don’t know. If you don’t know — as you indicate here — then how do you know the case cannot be won?


128 posted on 12/04/2008 4:53:44 AM PST by Lee'sGhost (Johnny Rico picked the wrong girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thesetruths

kinda funny the attempt there to alter our constitution.

funny because it doesn’t help their cause — instead, by placement of the comma there, it requires all US presidents to have been alive at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.


129 posted on 12/04/2008 4:55:54 AM PST by kpp_kpp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: flaglady47

“I’m not going to do your research for you. Go read what our founding fathers had to say about this clause and then get back to me. You obviously are having trouble figuring out the meaning by reading the Constitution itself. I can’t help you, or should I say I won’t help you. Now don’t be lazy about doing the research. You asked the question, you research it to figure out the answer if you need more proof. Will be looking forward to hearing the results of your research.”

He’s meticulously and comprehensively done just that—repeatedly. His question was rhetorical—such a distinction doesn’t exist as those selfsame founding fathers clarified in their very first Act of Congress.

What’s missing is the evidence that contradicts that, which is what you were asked for, but naturally you cannot provide it—being as it doesn’t exist and all.


130 posted on 12/04/2008 5:03:00 AM PST by Newtiebacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: BP2

Obama’s own grandmother indicates that she was present when Obama was born in Kenya.

http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244


131 posted on 12/04/2008 5:04:09 AM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FFranco

“This citation proves that because Obama was NOT born in America, and his mother was under 21, and his father was not a US citizen, he is NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, and therefore cannot serve as President.”

But Donofrio’s case is not even contending that Obama was NOT born in America. (Or is this also included in his case?)

Again, if Donofrio is challenging Obama’s citizenship based strictly on his father’s citizenship status, and not the actual place of birth, then this case is most likely a dead issue.

Can someone explain as to whether Donofrio’s case is also demanding that Obama’s original birth records be unsealed?


132 posted on 12/04/2008 5:08:26 AM PST by motoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Newtiebacker

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

You will not be able to stay home, brother.
You will not be able to plug in, turn on and cop out.
You will not be able to lose yourself on skag and skip,
Skip out for beer during commercials,
Because the revolution will not be televised.

The revolution will not be televised.
The revolution will not be brought to you by Xerox
In 4 parts without commercial interruptions.
The revolution will not show you pictures of Nixon
blowing a bugle and leading a charge by John
Mitchell, General Abrams and Spiro Agnew to eat
hog maws confiscated from a Harlem sanctuary.
The revolution will not be televised.

The revolution will not be brought to you by the
Schaefer Award Theatre and will not star Natalie
Woods and Steve McQueen or Bullwinkle and Julia.
The revolution will not give your mouth sex appeal.
The revolution will not get rid of the nubs.
The revolution will not make you look five pounds
thinner, because the revolution will not be televised, Brother.

There will be no pictures of you and Willie May
pushing that shopping cart down the block on the dead run,
or trying to slide that color television into a stolen ambulance.
NBC will not be able predict the winner at 8:32
or report from 29 districts.
The revolution will not be televised.

There will be no pictures of pigs shooting down
brothers in the instant replay.
There will be no pictures of pigs shooting down
brothers in the instant replay.
There will be no pictures of Whitney Young being
run out of Harlem on a rail with a brand new process.
There will be no slow motion or still life of Roy
Wilkens strolling through Watts in a Red, Black and
Green liberation jumpsuit that he had been saving
For just the proper occasion.

Green Acres, The Beverly Hillbillies, and Hooterville
Junction will no longer be so damned relevant, and
women will not care if Dick finally gets down with
Jane on Search for Tomorrow because Black people
will be in the street looking for a brighter day.
The revolution will not be televised.

There will be no highlights on the eleven o’clock
news and no pictures of hairy armed women
liberationists and Jackie Onassis blowing her nose.
The theme song will not be written by Jim Webb,
Francis Scott Key, nor sung by Glen Campbell, Tom
Jones, Johnny Cash, Englebert Humperdink, or the Rare Earth.
The revolution will not be televised.

The revolution will not be right back after a message
bbout a white tornado, white lightning, or white people.
You will not have to worry about a dove in your
bedroom, a tiger in your tank, or the giant in your toilet bowl.
The revolution will not go better with Coke.
The revolution will not fight the germs that may cause bad breath.
The revolution will put you in the driver’s seat.

The revolution will not be televised, will not be televised,
will not be televised, will not be televised.
The revolution will be no re-run brothers;
The revolution will be live.


133 posted on 12/04/2008 5:08:32 AM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: montesquiue

Hear,hear.


134 posted on 12/04/2008 5:13:10 AM PST by HANG THE EXPENSE (Defeat liberalism, its the right thing to do for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

***the citizenship of his father, who was a Kenyan national and subject of Great Britain.***

Which just proves the point about divided loyalty which the Founding Fathers were trying to make. Given the stories floating around about Obama’s visit to Kenya and his meddling in their election, it would certainly seem that he has divided loyalties. Not to mention the fact of all his relatives still in Kenya.


135 posted on 12/04/2008 5:13:37 AM PST by nanetteclaret (Blessed Martyrs of Compiegne, Pray for Us!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: motoman
Does any aspect of Donofrio’s case even challenge the actual location/country of Obama’s birth?

ICBW, but I believe Donofrio's case does....albeit in a round-about manner.

He is suing the NJ SoS for not vetting BHO or the other candidates as to their Constitutional qualifications for office. If the NJ SoS did not vet the candidates, Donofrio wins and SCOTUS would rule that such vetting must take place. If the NJ SoS did vet the candidates, then whatever bona-fides (e.g. birth certificates) were used by the candidates must be presented.

Either way, IMO, this will require the release of BHO's birth certificate which may show that he was not born in HI.

My .02

136 posted on 12/04/2008 5:15:30 AM PST by Roccus (Someday it'll all make sense.............maybe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: woofie
Again, the argument is not that Obama is not a citizen, but rather the kind of citizenship he enjoys. The Constitution makes it perfectly clear that there is a difference as to the means by which you claim citizenship when it comes to being the President. Obviously the Founders considered it important since they took the time to spell it out.
137 posted on 12/04/2008 5:16:26 AM PST by jwparkerjr (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BP2
“There is no way that anyone can argue about whether Barack Obama is a citizen,” Singer said. “In this country, we have a system known as jus soli or birthright by citizenship. You are a citizen by being born on American soil and he (Obama) was born in Hawaii.”

Really? Prove it. How hard can it be to simply put the matter to rest with the proper document? By withholding proof, Obama is forcing all these different people to to spend who knows how much money and time on something he could clear up in a minute.

The longer this continues, the more it looks like he truly is not qualified to be POTUS and not just by birth. No matter how this ends, he has shown his lack of character and is not a man worthy of respect, nor the office of President. He cannot be trusted nor counted upon to do the right things on behalf of We, The People.

God bless Justice Thomas. He is a man I most definitely respect and admire.

138 posted on 12/04/2008 5:16:51 AM PST by GBA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BP2

This last statement is what I have been saying all along...Total allegiance...not “mixed” allegiance.


139 posted on 12/04/2008 5:18:11 AM PST by Sacajaweau (I'm planting corn...Have to feed my car...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calenel
"It doesn't mention a requirement for both parents to be citizens ..."

"And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born ..."

It does not say "the children of a citizen" or the "children of any citizen" --- it says "the children of citizens". That's two ... plural ... mom ... dad ... easy stuff.

If you want to mince words and re-interpret the phrase to mean "any citizen", you must consider original intent, which was to protect the new USA from British insurgence immediately following the Revolution. The Founders, however, were forward thinking and realized that through their heirs, this new democratic nation (or any democratic nation for that matter) could be usurped via the machinations of government.

Their verbiage reflects their desire to see that those children raised under the influence of foreign laws and governments, or who may have an interest in foreign laws and governments, would *not* be eligible to direct the government of this nation. It is clear, logical, and for the good of us all -- even if it flies in the face of your chosen candidate. I support it. All patriots should.

As a leader, neither Obama or McCain is worth opening this Pandora's box. I'd toss them both for the good of the nation before rewriting the protections in our Constitution against foreign powers. It is that simple.
140 posted on 12/04/2008 5:18:15 AM PST by so_real
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 921-922 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson