Posted on 12/05/2008 6:33:15 AM PST by maineman
I thought we should have a link to post any and all updates.
Indeed. Donofrio (and his supporters) have latched on to the idea that there is a "two-tiered" approach to defining native born Americans --a "first-class" and "second-class" category of citizens, if you will. According to Donofrio's argument, we have "first-class" citizens who are Americans born in America to American citizens. Only these individuals are eligible to be President. Then we have "second-class" citizens who are Americans born in America to one or both parents not having citizenship. These "second-class" Americans are full American citizens in all aspects of the law with the one exception that they cannot serve as President.
Following Donofrio's argument, Obama is a "second-class" native-born American by virtue of the fact that his father was not an American citizen at the time of his birth. Where Donofrio finds this in the Constitution, I'm not quite sure. But I'm hoping that the USSC clears this matter up in one of two ways, either by codifying Dread Scott II and systematically disqualifying millions of native-born American citizens from Presidential eligibility or by telling Donofrio and his followers that in 2008 we do not have "first-class" and "second-class" American citizens.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Yes. There is evidence that McCain was born in Colon,Panama and therefore at birth was a native born citizen of Panama. He is a naturalized citizen of the US, but was not a “natural born” citizen at birth. I believe that is why McCain and the RNC were silent about the questions of Obama’s past all during the campaign. Maybe McCain thought he would win and all would be fine. But it didn't work out that way after all.
Right now, I do not care who is President, but whomever it is they must meet Constitutional requirements to hold the Office of Commander In Chief! Our Constitution must be upheld!
Nah. You just needed another moments thought on it. There is a lot of info to keep track of. I have a handle on SOME of it. lol
You owe me a keyboard.
I’m not saying the British citizenship voids the US citizenship. What it does is it divides his allegiance which our founding fathers did not want our President to have. Just my thought on the matter!
Bookmark
Yeah, yeah. That’s right!
(I think I’ll remember that when one of my kids tell me how mistaken I am!)
That’s a beautiful story. The thought went through my mind, too, about all the soldiers who weathered through the horrible winter at Valley Forge in 1778, and I couldn’t help but wonder what they would have thought about all the ‘conservatives’ who keep telling us that we need to get over this and move on to ‘more important things’...
Donofrio is defining it as a person born in the U.S. of two parents who are U.S. citizens. His definition is at odd with U.S. law - McCain is a natural born citizen on the basis of his parents being U.S. citizens who had resided in the states for some years prior to his birth. But if the Supreme Court takes up the Donofrio case and rules for the plaintiff then both McCain and Obama are disqualified.
It works for me. :-)
Perhaps they are apprehensive about the effect denying Obama the presidency might have. I believe if Obama is not allowed to take office, his minions will revolt and cause great physical damage to the nation. There will be civil war.
This fear is no reason to shred the Constitution, but the fear is one based in reality.
Yes, I have read that and I STILL DISAGREE. And so will the Supreme Court today (as I belive today’s hearing is based on this.)
The reason is that the argument uses the very weakest claim, that to “natural law”. (Please recall that Judge Bork’s attempts to explain this concept was one of the main reasons he was eventually voted down in his confirmation hearing.)
Natural Law is an interesting concept, but by it’s very nature it’s not written. Thus, to a legal system totally based on writings, it’s a the poor cousin of real law. We see our current SC justices are happy to even site European Law, but natural law hasn’t made an appearance in any decision for many many years.
The fellows argument is that the fathers citizenship is more important than the mothers, based on natural law. If there were no REAL LAWS on this it might be an interesting argument. But as there is a vast body of law regarding citzenship, and the vast majority of it today views men and women as equivelent, it is a very weak argument.
He is essentially arguing that the way people thought about things cica 1785 is knowable in the abscence of any written laws, and applicable.
Even his one citation (as quoted on the blog contradicts his own point, that natural law is supreme. The quote from the circa 1780 law book is “The laws have decided this question in several countries, and their regulations must be followed”
Well, we do have laws and regulations and Donofrio’s weird “two class of citizenship” ideas are not codified in them. He alone seems to have figured this out in 2008!!
I don’t find that compelling and neither will the court.
ARGHH!!! Why doesn't Jim put an "edit" feature on this board?!?!?
As well as Calero
No it is not, because generally the U.S. doesn't own the property. Most overseas bases are built on foreign territory with permission granted by a treaty, or they're shared with the miltiary of the host country, or like Gitmo the property is leased. Unlike an embassy, the land is almost never owned by the U.S. so it is not U.S. territory. Children born overseas on U.S. bases get their natural born status through their parents, at least one of whom is a U.S. citizen and associated with the miltary.
I believe that partisanship will come to an ugly head regardless. Sooner or later.
Sorry, a naturalized citizen is not a “natural born” citizen as pertains to President. I have not listed three types of citizenship. There is citizen and natural born citizen. A citizen can be naturalized as in becoming a citizen after being born outside of US soil to citizen parents...or becoming a citizen after moving here from another country. A “natural born” citizen is born of two citizen parents and born on US soil. The parents don’t need to be “natural born” themselves, just citizens.
There is so much discussion about the “natural born” status as it pertains to President and Vice President. Senators do not have to be “natural born” but must be citizens for nine years. House members do not have to be “natural born” but must be citizens for seven years. Citizens may be a Governor, House or Senate member, but only “natural born” citizens may hold the Office of President.
We will soon know what our US Supreme Court Justices decide.
I've wondered why "the powers that be" would allow such a circumstance to exist. (I know it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it is interesting, isn't it?)
For anyone who STILL does not understand the “natural born issue”, Leo has a new post at his thread that breaks it down about as simple as it can be. This is MUST reading for anyone interested in this case.
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
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.