Replies

Can someone explain this case in a nutshell?

Thank you for not asking for "some nutcase to explain this shell of a case," Jay.

It is basically the same as the Donofrio case, but better crafted with a better route to the SCOTUS:

http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/2008/12/donofrio-dual-citizenship-natural-born.html

...and above in the blog.

Nov 25 2008 Application (08A469) for stay and/or injunction, submitted to Justice Ginsburg. Nov 26 2008 Application (08A469) denied by Justice Ginsburg. Nov 29 2008 Application (08A469) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia. Dec 8 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 12, 2008. Dec 8 2008 Application (08A469) referred to the Court by Justice Scalia.

Ginsberg didn't want the Court to look at this case and Scalia did. The case was refiled and Scalia referred the case to the Court. I'll have to read this case, but this is on the issue that Obama must show his Certificate of Live Birth. The Constitutional issue of Obama being a natural born citizen is the question. Scalia sees what we see now let's see if he can push this case far enough.

Nutshell version: Petitioner’s contention is that since Barack’s father was NOT a citizen, Barack himself is not a “natural born citizen”.

Don’t blow it off yet, keep reading.

Fact, admitted by Obama’s FactCheck.org: Obama’s father was a British subject, and NOT a citizen of the USA.

The case questions whether someone can be deemed a “natural born citizen” if one parent is _not_ a citizen. This is a legitimate question, as the label is not clearly defined in law for anyone other than someone actually born on US soil to US-citizen parents; there is reasonable legal basis for the notion that a child born of a foreign-citizen parent is ergo subject to, er, foreign influence (a la the “anchor baby” arguments). Petitioner’s contention is that since Barack’s father was NOT a citizen, Barack himself is not a “natural born citizen”.

Put another way: petitioner contends that the term “natural born citizen” applies to someone who BOTH (A) has been born on US soil, and (B) both parents are US citizens (by birth or by naturalization). As Barack’s father was not a US citizen by any means, Barack’s citizenship is more procedural than by birth, a disqualifying distinction.

The prior case (just thrown out, and widely & badly misconstrued as the Supreme Court rejecting the “birth certificate issue” entirely) addressed this, but with hastily-included flaws which apparenly the Court did not want to deal with. This case corrects those flaws and addresses the issue in a more robust manner.

Personally, I find this very interesting, as my daughter’s mother is a Canadian citizen, and I understand the applicable laws well enough to at least doubt whether she can be deemed a “natural born citizen”. Her mother (and yes, my beloved bride) will be seriously cheesed off to learn her darling girl can’t grow up to be President Of The USA after all - hence I’d like to see it resolved as well.

The Constitutional concern is that due to the presumably close relationship between a child and parent, a parent of non-US citizenship could sway that child to act (particularly as President) in a manner not wholly beholden to the United States of America.