Georgia Judge Michael Malihi is a cowardly traitor

http://english.pravda.ru ^ | February 6 2012 | Mark S. McGrew

[bushpilot1]

It’s clearly established Obama meets the definition of an unnatural born citizen.

[philman_36]

It DOES NOT MATTER what any SCOTUS ruling says, if said ruling was based on the citizenship requirements in place at that time, and those requirements were later altered by Congress -—

Since Congress can only enact legislation pertaining to naturalization, per Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 (To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization...), how could Congress pass legislation concerning a natural born citizen and then alter that legislation later, as you state, when it was never empowered to do so?

Aren't those "altered requirements" you're talking about merely changes to legislation previously enacted by Congress?

[bushpilot1]

Why did the US government cite Vattel’s chapter 212 in the WKA brief to the US Supreme Court?

[Kansas58]

You are clearly wrong on the law.

Congress DOES have the authority, through Legislation, to alter or change citizenship rules for Natural Born as well as Naturalized Citizens.

James Madison, Father of the Constitution, clearly said so, and I have posted his statement to this thread at least twice, already.

Since Citizenship rules were vague, at best, it was necessary for Congress to define the rules for Naturalization as well as for Natural Born Citizens.

The primary author of the Constitution, James Madison, said that Congress had such power.

That is good enough for me.

[bushpilot1]

What does natural mean??

[bushpilot1]

You lose this.

[bushpilot1]

what does natural mean in natural born citizen????

[Kansas58]

Who cares?
It does not matter, as Vattel no longer controls the law on these issues.
As Madison stated, clearly, Congress had the authority to enact and change laws concerning citizenship.
Congress HAS changed the laws on citizenship, several times, since WKA was decided.
At the time of that antiquated MOOT ruling, there was little other guidance for the Court.
Now, there is, in the form of Congressional Legislation.

The rules to obtain Citizenship at Birth have changed over time. Natural Born Citizen means Citizen at Birth and NOTHING else!

[philman_36]

First off, my apologies for earlier. Nobody likes being played the fool and too many folks have done just that with "Internet documents" in the past. I wouldn't put it past somebody to attribute something to any of the lawyers involved that they didn't write.

Having said that, beyond a few things like typos and poor word choice I would say it was pretty concise.
I don't think it'll change much, but who knows. I expect the response will be that the things she mentioned would be considered in the review process and that she will be notified later on the conclusion reached.

I'm not a lawyer and have never played one on TV either so your mileage may vary.

I did rather like her asking about how Malihi could use Ankeny when it was never presented.

[bushpilot1]

What does natural mean..

[Kansas58]

What does: “YOU WILL NEVER WIN A COURT CASE” mean?

[sometime lurker]

Apology accepted; I can certainly respect verifying the facts.

I have a feeling this could be a repeat of the Judge Land situation. Orly insulting the court in her appeal isn’t a great way to go, but I’m not a lawyer so I’m not sure of the consequences.

[philman_36]

Congress DOES have the authority, through Legislation, to alter or change citizenship rules for Natural Born as well as Naturalized Citizens.
Then from whence does such authority derive?
In other words, what specific Article, Section and Clause of the Constitution gives Congress the power, much less the authority, to perform this function?
It obviously isn't Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4, since that pertains to naturalization, so where does Congress get the authority you claim it has?

Since you've learned to link it shouldn't be too hard for you to provide support for your conclusions.

[Kansas58]

James Madison says that Congress has such power.

That is good enough for me, as Madison WROTE THE CONSTITUTION!

[bushpilot1]

Tell us what natural meant several hundred years ago..I will give you a clue..

[bushpilot1]

Madison said the law of nations is a part of our laws...Madison placed Vattel’s Law of nations is the Constitution.

Obama as an unnatural born citizen violates the law of nations and the Constitution.

The Supreme Court in 2004 said Vattel’s Law of Nations has been a part of our law over 200 years.

Daniel Webster said the same and he directly referenced Vattel.

[bushpilot1]

Madison said the law of nations is a part of our laws...Madison placed Vattel’s Law of Nations in the Constitution.

Obama as an unnatural born citizen violates the law of nations and the Constitution.

The Supreme Court in 2004 said Vattel’s Law of Nations has been a part of our law over 200 years.

Daniel Webster said the same and he directly referenced Vattel.

[philman_36]

Can you give me a link to the Expatriation Act of 1868?

[noinfringers2]

I have encountered crooked, biased, and prejudiced judges. Not any personal effects but observations in the course of employment. As such I have reason to believe judges can err if not unintentional and/or be crooked by purpose. Today most judges come from the ranks of lawyers and I’m not the only person in the USA who put lawyers at the bottom of the integrity pole.

[patlin]

Then from whence does such authority derive? ... Since you've learned to link it shouldn't be too hard for you to provide support for your conclusions

I'll be interested to see that link also, where man has the authority to change that which God created ... the "natural" increase of any given society.