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

To: philman_36

I do think the “one parent not being a citizen” argument is a waste of time to the extent of trying to get him removed from office. I would raise the argument, but I wouldn’t be making it the primary focus like the people suing are doing. Everyone in Congress knew where his father had citizenship before he was nominated and the issue was brought up early. And there’s no way in hell that he’ll be impeached for it. If it was uncovered definitively that he wasn’t born in the U.S. or lost his citizenship and lied about it, he most certainly would be impeached for it. That’s why that should be the focus. Furthermore, there is no definition of the term in the constitution. Evidence as to how some early politicians used the term and its meaning is persuasive only. The Court has the ultimate authority to define the term since it’s not defined in the constitution, and it has not done so in a binding matter, and it’s free not to interpret it to require both parents being citizens if and when it ever decides to tackle the issue.


44 posted on 08/10/2010 1:06:22 AM PDT by stevenl77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: stevenl77

You’re tedious and repetitive.


49 posted on 08/10/2010 1:15:21 AM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

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