Posted on 08/04/2009 3:21:40 AM PDT by Zakeet
Despite a congressional resolution affirming President Obama's U.S. birth and a reaffirmation of his birth certificate's authenticity from Hawaiian officials, media outlets continue to air frivolous allegations that the president was born in Kenya, rendering him ineligible for the presidency. Let's pretend, for just a moment, that the birthers had credible evidence that Obama was foreign-born. Then what would happen?
Resignation, impeachment, or nothing. If Obama stood his ground, and Congress stood by him, then the only way to legally remove him from office would be for someone to sue. Problem is, no one would have standing to bring such a lawsuit. To establish standing, a plaintiff must show that he has suffered an injury personal to him, that the defendant caused the injury, and that the court could provide a remedy. That turns out to be an impossible task.
Average citizens could not show a personalized injury because Obama's allegedly illegitimate presidency would impact everyone in roughly the same way. Courts invariably dismiss such claims, like the 1937 case alleging that Justice Hugo Black was ineligible to serve because as a member of Congress he had voted to increase the justices' salaries. Even membership in much smaller aggrieved groups generally doesn't work. The Supreme Court rejected a suit brought by parents of African-American children challenging the IRS's lax enforcement of anti-discrimination laws and another by legislators who claimed their voting rights were diluted by the line-item veto. In both cases, the communal nature of the injury precluded standing. Thus the lawsuit of Army Maj. Stefan Cook, who argued that his pending deployment to Afghanistan by an illegitimate president constituted a particularized injury, was doomed to failure. (The case was mooted when the Pentagon canceled his deployment.)
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Can't afford a place in the country. Looks like I'm going to have to start visiting relatives to see who has the most comfortable couch.
If ANYONE thinks obama and the Dems could politically survive the discovery that he isn’t an American citizen and is in-elligible to be President, they have lost their minds...
Just as if you hired a CEO who lied on his resume, and your Stockholders had a procedure for removing the CEO, the same procedure would be used to remove an unqualified CEO as a qualified but incompetent or criminal one.
“In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President” U.S. Constitution from Article II
And say Hello to President “brain damage” Biden.
ANARCHY would ensue, and so be it. Politicians would have no one but themselves to blame. It would be up to domestic Patriots to retake the Republic amid the chaos.
Are they sworn to not resign?
Good point
But what are they going to do when they are in the WH with Obama and the US military knock on the door ???
Leave enmass ???
I'm not being argumentative, here. I'm relying upon judicial precedent from the very first Supreme Court decision in this country, Chisholm v. Georgia, upon the very first Supreme Court Justice John Jay, upon the 1803 decision that firmly established the system of checks and balances, Marbury v. Madison, and the dicta of the Supreme Court Justice in that decision, John Marshall. Additionally, I'm relying upon the plain words of John Bingham, the author of the 14th Amendment.
There is a very clear reason why no statute law and no Acts of Congress deal with the specific term of art "natural-born citizen." That clear reason is that neither statute law nor Acts of Congress can supercede the supreme law of the land enshrined in the Constitution.
It will take a Constitutional Amendment to accomplish what you mistakenly believe to already be in effect. And, furthermore, from my reading on the matter over the past year and a half, there are even problems with amending the Constitution to this end, again going back to Marbury v. Madison. Going the states route is problematic as well, under the wording of Article V.
So, if you want to argue, argue with someone who hasn't bothered to understand the problem, because the position you're taking relies upon hearsay and faulty interpretation.
Nice screen name, by the way, "Old Devil Dog."
Slate seems to think that the fact that there may be no legal recourse is “pretty cool.” This is how you get explosions of civil disobedience.
That said though I want Obama and his dimbulb Democrat comrades out of power before they can wreck this country any further, and if this BC issue can get him removed or weakened so much that he's unelectable in 2012 than I'll be more than happy to be wrong and will proudly join the BC movement.
I hope my comments don't get me labeled as a troll because I love my country, and support our military and believe with my whole heart that these two things have been the greatest force for good in the history of mankind. I've been a conservative since I became a born again Christian in 1987 and have been counter protesting a group of anti-war protesters in my town of Redlands since 2006, and have even posted threads called the Redlands FReep here at FR. I still FReep the moonbats, but since I've been doing it by myself for several months now I haven't been posting threads on this.
I like many of my fellow FReepers am disgusted with the raping of our country and the pillaging of our economy by Obama and his socialist thieves in congress, and want to see it end as soon as possible.
I admit I've accused those who believe in the BC issue of being kooks and tin foil hat wearers in previous threads and I was wrong. I still have my disagreements but I believe those of you who think this BC issue is important are great patriots and are doing what is in the best interest of this country and the constitution.
And to good folks like pissant and others, I apologize for derogatory remarks I've made and will even abstain from using the term "birther" as it is a derogatory term used by the left to smear my fellow conservatives.
Obama is my enemy not my fellow FReepers.
The first thing about this article that strikes me is that it was even written. It’s a serious piece, (even though written from the lib view) asking questions about the law, who has/hasn’t standing in the courts and what the remedies might be.
You are correct. The courts have not ruled on any of those issues I believe. However, we were discussing the specific instance of John McCain. Someone born overseas to American parents and that has consistently been held that these children are indeed born Americans. Starting with the Naturalization Act of 1790.
In McCain’s case, I’m not even sure if this applies. He was born in the Panama Canal zone which at the time of his birth was an American possession. So he was born on American soil even though it is not now American soil.
Manchurian (Kenyan) Candidate put on his throne by whom?
And, you're failing to recognize, that that Act was repealed and replaced, in 1795, using identical language with the exception of the specific Constitutional term of art "natural-born citizen(s)." This term was removed, and replaced with simply "citizens."
Why, do you suppose, was this done? It was a recognition of Congressional overreach, perhaps the very first example of such a thing. Congress exceeded powers enumerated to it by the Constitution, and corrected itself.
The act was not repealed for that specific reason. They updated it. They got a lot of things wrong in the first one, for instance things like slaves not being citizens which took the 14th amendment to correct. They never used the term natural born citizen again ever. So if you want to go by that, then no one is a natural born citizen and therefore no one can serve as President.
What it does show though is the thinking of our founding fathers (Madison, the writer of the constitution was in that Congress) concerning what a natural born citizen was. And that thinking concerning a child born overseas to two parents has not changed. They took the term natural born out of the law for all types of citizens.
PS I know you are referring to the article.
thanks
What if he was born in Kenya and lied about it to get elected? What then?
One thing for sure; the communists are starting to “discuss” a solution to the inevitable discovery of 0ghosta’s lies and deception.
This is a very good sign; the path-forward is being explored and debunked in advance!
Here is what I posted early this morning to negate the Left’s and the MSM’s talking points in narrowing the discussion to BC/kooks talking points:
“Speaking for myself, the BC is part of the general question. Where is zero’s paper trail? Why is it sealed? The idiots elected a ghost not a brilliant, handsome, teleprompted Messiah.
I want to see his records: medical, school grades/student loans/nationalities/names, selective service, multiple social security numbers and who paid for his clairvoyant life.
I bet that the BC is just the finger in the dam even if there are no surprises in it; he wouldn’t want the rest of his records seen. He must have lied numerous times about his name(s), nationality (a foreign student), SS numbers, etc.
The Brilliant One must have graduated with a negative GPA and passed along under the racist affirmative action boondoggle!
Regards,
A ghoster NOT a birther”
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.