Posted on 08/11/2012 2:57:39 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Now, I’m tired.
Obviously, you’re a product of the public school system. You’ve just illustrated why we need to change things.
I guess you know better than Romney and everybody else making these decisions.
I give up.
You win.
Here’s some reading material
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/08/obama-is-citizen-of-united-states-and.html
I don’t where the source of your definition of “natural born citizen” comes from, but it’s not the law.
I refer you to post #34 and the 14th amendment, which actually did define it.
I rest my case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpretation per US State Department 7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency (TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998) >
a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural-born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
b. Section 1, Article II, of the Constitution states, in relevant part that ―No Person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible for the Office of President.‖
c. The Constitution does not define "natural born". The ―Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization‖, enacted March 26, 1790, (1 Stat. 103,104) provided that, ―...the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born ... out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States
d. This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf
‘Translation: If you are born in this country, you are automatically a citizen. That is, a “natural born citizen”. Capiche?’
WRONG!!
If you are born in this country, you are a US citizen, but you are not necessarily a natural born citizen.
All natural born citizens are US citizens,
but not all US citizens are natural born citizens.
If you are born in US to US citizen parentS, you are a nbc (of course, you are a US citizen too.) eligible to be the president or vp.
If you are just a US citizen but not a nbc you are not eligible to be the president or vp.
2-prong test for Natural born citizen - born in USA, to USA citizen parentS.
Anybody can be ‘naturalized’ in US to be a naturalized US citizen by following the naturalization procedure, but a naturalized US citizen is NOT eligible to be the president or vp
You didn’t go to public schools? Prep schools, perhaps? I have a masters, same as you (no, a JD is NOT considered a doctorate) and can count to twenty without taking my shoes off, barrister.
>> Obviously, you’re a product of the public school system. You’ve just illustrated why we need to change things.
How is that relevant to the interpretation of the Constitution?
14th amendment citizen is NOT natural born citizen.
14 amendment citizen is citizenship by statute or law, therefore is NOT natural born citizen!
Remember, if you need the law to give you US citizenship, you are not a natural born citizen.
Natural - nature - by place and by parentage.
There are 4 supreme court cases defining nbc as one born on US soil to US citizen parents.
Numerous historical letters define nbc.
The founders used extensively Vattel’s ‘The Law of Nations’ that defines nbc as one born on US soil to US citizen parentS.
Congress has tried numerous times to change the definition of nbc but failed every time.
In obama’s own resolution 511, they ‘resolved’ that John McCain is a nbc since his parents were US citizens at time of his birth and he was born on US military base outside of US. (actually he was born in Panama under Panamanian jurisdiction and so he is not article 2 natural born citizen)
Go do some home work. It is not that hard to see the difference between a nbc and a US citizen by statute/law
Look, I really don't give a damn what you think about it. It doesn't even really matter what I think about it, because the political system in this country has decided to give the current resident of the WH a pass on it, for whatever reason. The law and constitution don't matter if the men with guns who are willing to use them are not willing to enforce them.
A lawsuit filed in an Arizona superior court by Kenneth Allen (Allen v. Arizona Democratic Party) alleged that Obama was not a natural-born citizen because his father “was a resident of Kenya and thus a British citizen”. Allen argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Minor v. Happersett required a natural-born citizen to be born in the U.S. of two U.S. citizen parents; however, the judge dismissed the suit on March 7, 2012, ruling that “President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution” and that “[c]ontrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett ... does not hold otherwise.”
Wow! You sure zinged us with your superior research skills. None of us have been following this issue and that ruling slipped right past us! Well played, Einstein.
Do you wonder if Obama is a natural born citizen of Great Britain as well? Isn’t there a problem with natural born citizenship and dual citizenship?
I think this probably answers your question:
In October 2008, Leo Donofrio, an attorney from New Jersey, filed suit against Nina Mitchell Wells to challenge the eligibility of Obama, Republican presidential candidate John McCain (see details here) and the Socialist Workers Party candidate Roger Calero. Donofrio asserted that all three candidates were ineligible: Obama due to having dual U.S. and British nationality at birth (the latter via Obama’s father), McCain due to being born in the Panama Canal Zone, and Calero due to allegedly still having Nicaraguan citizenship.
Donofrio was not among those who claimed Obama might have been born outside Hawaii. Also, Donofrio did not challenge the fact that Obama is a U.S. citizen and instead challenged only whether Obama is a natural-born citizen.
The case was referred to the Supreme Court by Justice Clarence Thomas. When the case reached the United States Supreme Court on December 8, 2008, the Court declined without comment to hear it.
Lord you are dense. Do you really think we don’t already know the history of the case against Obama? We were here, in the trenches, donating money to those bringing suit. Where were you? Helping write an amicus brief for Axelrod? LOL
Obviously you don’t know much about this issue at all. And as an attorney, I really detest non-legal, biased opinions being espoused as legal truth, even though we have the same goal - to get Obama out of office. You’re spreading a bunch of misinformation about this issue which just makes us look like a bunch of nutcakes, especially to people who aren’t conservatives.
There’s not one shred of information from the Constitution, statutes, or caselaw, that what you’re saying is true. Unless you can prove that Obama was born outside the country, your throwing money down a rat hole, if you think a lawsuit on this issue is going to bear fruit.
And I’m not about to throw away quality conservatives like Rubio and Jindal as potential presidential candidates based upon your completely flawed theory about what the Consitution states.
Attack me all you want, but you’re the one that sounds ridiculous.
I hesitate to even ask this, because you already plainly accept their hand-waving, but have you actually read the decision in question?
Hey Mike, “Dad” gave us the Bushes and their cronies with his VP pick. A decision the GOP and USA are still paying for. Wanna’ invoke your Dad’s memory? Try on things he did that weren’t disasters.
It was either George H.W. Bush or Gerald Ford as “co-president” and he chose the less damaging of the two, or aren’t you old enough to remember that?
I’m old enough to remember Jack Kemp.
OMG, I just remembered ‘76! Geez Mike, of all the things to invoke your Dad’s memory about, VP picks ain’t one!
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.