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

To: baltimorepoet
>> How about someone born overseas, to a mother that is Canadian but her husband is American? Could the issue be forced, to do a DNA test, to prove that the husband actually is the father? <<

Great question! Would be really intriguing in the context of a future POTUS election contest.

Anyway, I know the INS now uses DNA testing a lot to prove or disprove that visa applicants claiming close kinship to US citizens are really who they claim to be. It's a big business for some DNA-testing companies.

What's more, the specific issue you raise must have come up, maybe quite a few times.

Still, I have absolutely no idea as to when a DNA test would be required, as opposed to being merely voluntary, especially if the child in question should have a valid birth certificate and/or a valid consular report of birth abroad.

Any immigration lawyers on FR?

471 posted on 04/06/2016 2:57:48 PM PDT by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies ]


To: Hawthorn

Immigration is not my area, but every present or former DC lawyer has spent at least an hour on this.

#1: US statute is very clear. He is a natural born citizen. Natural born does not mean native born. Natural born means a citizen at the moment of birth, by operation of law. Law is very clear. Because of mother, and his later US residency, he is clearly a NB citizen.

(See US Code 1401 and Harvard Law Review http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/)

#2: Even if there was a possibility of a successful legal challenge, the courts are very reluctant to go against voters’ choices. For example, JFK’s in actuality not winning Illinois, and therefore NOT winning the presidency, Nixon knew even though the FBI had all the evidence of election stealing vote fraud by the Chicago Daley Machine, the people thought JFK had won and the courts would have been VERY reluctant to get involved.... and Nixon declined to take the matter into the courts.

For example, SCOTUS knew they had to, but hated having to be involved in Bush v. Gore. Regardless of their ruling, they knew the case would bring nothing but bad vibes for the Court.

That’s also why many Florida District Courts kicked their 2000 election cases to Leon County. “I’m not touching that one.....”

Also, there is the standing issue. Who exactly would one sue, and what is their standing to do so. Courts do not like cases such as this.


476 posted on 04/06/2016 3:26:56 PM PDT by Strac6 (Remember, the Primaries are shortlived. ALL THAT MATTERS IS THE NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | 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