Posted on 03/11/2012 9:23:03 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
In support of the opinion in US v Marguet-Pillado, 9th Cir. 2011, Judge Gwin, writing for the majority in his “III Analysis” dicta, states: “No one disputes that Marguet-Pillado’s requested instruction was ‘an accurate statement of the law,’ in that it correctly stated the two circumstances in which an individual born in 1968 is a natural-born United States citizen: (1) that the person was born in the United States or (2) born outside the United States to a biologically-related United States citizen parent who met certain residency requirements.” On March 1, Sheriff Arpaio’s Posse re-opened the possibility that Obama was born in Kenya by announcing that it had found probable cause to believe that Obama’s long form birth certificate was forged, newspaper birth announcements were unreliable, and that there was now no proof that Obama was born in the USA. A week earlier, with full knowledge of what the Arpaio Posse’s findings would be, “constitutional scholar” Obama’s legal team suddenly started citing the Marguet-Pillado case in multiple PA and GA ballot eligibility state appeals. The following language is included by Obama’s lawyers in the PA and GA MTD filings: “President Obama was a United States citizen from the moment of his birth inHawaii. Since he held citizenship from birth, all Constitutional qualifications have beenmet. Ankeny v. Governor of State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. App., 2009); see,United States v. Marguet-Pillado , 648 F.3d 1001, 1006 (9thCir., 2011). There is no basis to question the President’s citizenship or qualifications to hold office.” www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/08/.../10-50041.pdf
Thanks for the ping!
If that hooha is his ace in the hole then why did has his good buddy McCaskill (McLame's being vetted on SR 511) tried time and time and time again to change the Constitution on NBC and eligibility?
Not according to the two judge 9th Circuit Marguet-Pillado majority, contrary to all of the evidence that you cite and Minor v Happersett.
The Marguet-Pillado panel did not actually state that the defendant would be eligible to be POTUS if he could have established a biological relationship with the US citizen on his Mexican BC, but the Obama legal team cites this case to prove that Obama is eligible to be POTUS. This is jaw-droppingly desperate, IMO.
It seems, in reading INS case law, that the term “natural born citizen” is used in a sloppy short-hand way to equate to statutory foreign born citizens at birth as opposed to foreign born persons who must be naturalized, even though they might have one or more US citizens prior to the law change in 2000.
This sloppy, imprecise abuse of the term “natural born citizen” in foreign statutory births is being dishonestly conflated with Article II POTUS eligible natural born citizens as defined in Minor v Happersett.
The Obama legal team is trying to pull a “Johnny Cochran” and go for the tiny bit of daylight in the defensive line on a trick play (the glove that “doesn't fit”) hoping that the public will buy it. We know that over and over you will hear the uninformed citizen say “If his mom is a citizen it doesn't matter where he was born, he is eligible.”
Agreed. This appears to be a “bottom of the barrel” citation by the Obama legal team desperately searching just one bit of support in a federal case for foreign born eligibility.
After being beaten up for years by Obot and troll claims that the NBC language in Minor v Happersett is “dicta” and not precedent (a holding that was affirmed 9-0 by SCOTUS) the Obama legal team serves up this ludicrous spin by two 9th Circus judges.
US long form bogus. Nary a picture of the happy newly married couple. Sr.'s college friends (other than Abercrombie who was THERE!) knew anything about Ann or that there was a bouncing baby boy. Nary a picture or anyone who saw the baby bump. Then Barry Steve David Barack Obama Soetoro Dunham Whatever couldn't remember which hospital he was born in even though on his 5 minute walk from the Dunham's apartment to the Punahoa school everyday he had to cut through one hospital's parking lot. And we still don't know if he was born in the US, Canada or Kenya and to what parents since the BC he waved in front of the cameras is totally bogus and all other records are missing. Bottom line is he's 100% fake.
9th Cir. 2011
“The NBC language appears to have been placed in a jury instruction but a Dems party contributor and Obama backing illegal immigrant defending law firm for the express purpose of giving a federal appeals court the opportunity to declare Barry to be an NBC, IMO.”
Absolutely. 2011. How convenient for Barry.
I suspect that too.
"Just ask all of those kids from the Vietnam War era about being the child of an American citizen born abroad but not registered with a CRBA; even the Amerasian Acts passed in the 1980s only gave legal residency here in the U.S., not citizenship."
Most interesting. Thanks for posting.
As if it'd ever be heard. I've lost count on the number of cases thrown out over lack of a US voting citizen's standing. This last one where his only response to the court was a one finger salute had 57 kangaroos hopping around.
You may know about Joe's presser and I may know about Joe's presser but has the average voter seen an inkling of it? Much less do they understand it? No. And they won't unless CNNMSMBCCBSABCNBC honestly discuss it non-stop for two weeks straight and that ain't gonna happen.
A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen, is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.) The U.S. citizen parent must be genetically related to the child to transmit U.S. citizenship.
Birth Abroad Out-of-Wedlock to a U.S. Citizen Mother:
A person born abroad out-of-wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother may acquire U.S. citizenship under Section 309(c) of the INA if the mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of the person’s birth and if the mother was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the person’s birth. The mother must be genetically related to the person in order to transmit U.S. citizenship.
As if it wouldn't also destroy the GOP for allowing it to happen and covering it up? It should also destroy the SCOTUS as Thomas admitted they are "evading" the issue. And no Congressman from any party has stepped up to the plate. That would hit all three branches of government so don't hold your breath.
No one disputes that Marguet-Pillado's requested instruction was 'an accurate statement of the law,' in that it correctly stated the two circumstances in which an individual born in 1968 is a natural-born United States citizen: (1) that the person was born in the United States or (2) born outside the United States to a biologically-related United States citizen parent who met certain residency requirements.Plus, y'know, "no one disputes" that Zero *is* a "Constitutional scholar".
Mitt Romney was born in the US in Detroit on March 12, 1947. His father was born in Mexico to two American citizen parents.
There is some disagreement on that point. Lawrence Tribe and Ted Olson were requested by the Senate in 2008 to give an opinion on McCain's eligibility. They concluded that being born to to US citizens abroad was enough and they also opined that being born on US soil (jus solis) was sufficient in the case of Obama.
"The Constitution does not define the meaning of “natural born Citizen.” The U.S. Supreme Court gives meaning to terms that are not expressly defined in the Constitution by looking to the context in which those terms are used; to statutes enacted by the First Congress, Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783, 790-91 (1983); and to the common law at the time of the Founding. United Suites v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 655 (1898). These sources all confirm that the phrase “natural born” includes both birth abroad to parents who were citizens, and birth within a nation’s territory and allegiance. Thus, regardless of the sovereign status of the Panama Canal Zone at the time of Senator McCain’s birth, he is a “natural born” citizen because he was born to parents who were U.S. citizens.
and
Indeed, the statute that the First Congress enacted on this subject not only established that such children are U.S. citizens, but also expressly referred to them as “natural born citizens.” Act of Mar. 26, 1790, ch. 3, § 1, 1 Stat. 103, 104.
and
Historical practice confirms that birth on soil that is under the sovereignty of the United States, but not within a State, satisfies the Natural Born Citizen Clause. For example, Vice President Charles Curtis was born in the territory of Kansas on January 25, 1860 — one year before Kansas became a State. Because the Twelfth Amendment requires that Vice Presidents possess the same qualifications as Presidents, the service of Vice President Curtis verifies that the phrase “natural born Citizen” includes birth outside of any State but within U.S. territory. Similarly, Senator Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before its statehood, yet attained the Republican Party’s presidential nomination in 1964. And Senator Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961 — not long after its admission to the Union on August 21, 1959. We find it inconceivable that Senator Obama would have been ineligible for the Presidency had he been born two years earlier."
See my post #94
There has been no evidence that George Romney ever took the proper follow up actions. That was part of the problem back in '64 when he was a POTUS candidate. There were rumblings about his eligibility back then but he quicky dropped out of the race so the questions were also dropped.
Mitt has been shoved down our throats for a reason. That reason is because the GOP is cya-ing over allowing the Obama presidency stand. Once there's a GOP ineligible president then "they" have won. That old outdated Constitution will finally be shredded and it's welcome to the New Amerika.
“Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.”
Kangroos !! LOL
Yea, the courts 1) move too slow. 2) who the HELL would have imagined the people of America, the country FOUNDED on the principle of - if we don’t like you, we will overthrow you and kick you paooty to the curb, would EVER hear from our courts and government that WE do NOT have STANDING to question the system??? We don’t have WHAT?
Oh HELL no. Don’t have standing my left foot. As a whole we got too complacent and forgot the power we had in 1760. I want to be part of the movement which wakes people up to the REAL “YES WE CAN” of America. And it is NOT Barry Obama’s definition of the phrase.
Yes we can and do reserve the right to overthrow the government which no longer represents us or OUR will.
Mount up boys, we got work to do.
“He was born in Kenya and became an Indonesian citizen via adoption by Lolo Soetoro when barely past being a toddler. His adoption BC said “Born in Hawaii, father Lolo Soetoro, (Indonesian citizen).”
I'm not sure what you mean “Red Herring.” IMO, if Barry was born in Kenya, a supposition that you appear to support, then it is the Indonesian adoption that fades to irrelevance.
NBC is a constitutional birth status while subsequent adoption is not. Kenyan birth trumps Indonesian adoption, IMO.
Proving that Barry is ineligible due to an Indonesian adoption is extremely problematic. Any adoption records in Indonseia (most likely) or Hawaii (less likely, IMO) appear to have been scrubbed and not likely to be recovered until after Barry is either re-elected (urp!) or leaves office in Jan 2013. If Barry's college transcript shows he registered as a foreign national based on adoption that would be a game-changer, but that is only speculative for now while failure to prove an Hawaiian birth and failure to disprove a Kenyan birth is actively on the table. I am in the camp that doesn't consider a foreign adoption to automatically and permanently negate NBC status at birth.
Look at the Elg case. Little Elg was born on US soil to two naturalized US citizens. Then they expatriated her back to Sweden, IIRC at age four. Elg never disavowed her US citizenship, but was denied entry when she attempted to return to the US as an adult. She sued and won with SCOTUS declaring that parents cannot expunge the NBC status of a genuine US NBC.
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/325/case.html
"We conclude that respondent has not lost her citizenship in the United States and is entitled to all the rights and privileges of that citizenship." Elg did NOT have to be naturalized to regain her NBC status. She never lost it and I doubt Obama would have lost his either unless he renounced his US citizenship in Indonesia or Kenya to get a foreign passport and foreign student benefits, perhaps from some Muslim backers.
Of course, there has been no court test of a presidential candidate's eligibility for a candidate who's public record is that of being born NBC and then expatriated while a minor and the returning to reclaim a US citizenship.
For me any Indonesian adoption is not an NBC issue but an issue possible fraud by Obama to obtain foreign student benefits.
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.