Basically, the lawyer for the plaintiff has filled a letter advising (the court) of additional authorities found, Ramsay (reaffirming Vattel's definition for NBC as born in country to citizen parents) and St. George Tucker where he ("makes clear that the Framers relied upon Vattel’s definition above, not the common law concept concerning “subjects").
In other words, Barry (a/k/a Obama) would not be considered a "Natural Born Citizen" because he was born to a foreign father, and Barry himself inherited (by birthright) his foreign fathers foreign citizenship [assuming, of course, that Sr. was his legal father at birth]. No matter where he was born Barry, was born a subject to the crown of her majesty the Queen of England. The framers would never have considered someone with dual allegiance at birth to be considered a natural born citizen. It contradicts the very meaning of the term as known by them in 1787.
Wow, that was a GREAT summary! Thanks for putting me some knowledge (as they say on Ace of Spades, long story). I am hoping and praying this case goes somewhere. It sounds so promising, but the judges in this country just don’t seem interested in giving us a fair hearing.
Is this case making any progress? I think Mario Apuzzo’s case has an important hearing in early June. He and the fellow who filed it appear to have some real advantages where they filed it before he became president and also sued members of congress and cheney. Past cases tied to say the wrong party was sued.