Supremes to review citizenship arguments-Case challenging candidacy set for 'conference' of justices

World Net Daily ^ | 11-21-08 | Bob Unruh

[STARWISE]

A case that challenges President-elect Barack Obama's name on the 2008 election ballot citing questions over his citizenship has been scheduled for a "conference" at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Conferences are private meetings of the justices at which they review cases and decide which ones to accept for formal review.

This case is set for a conference Dec. 5, just 10 days before the Electoral College is scheduled to meet to make formal the election of Obama as the nation's next president.

The Supreme Court's website listed the date for the case brought by Leo C. Donofrio against Nina Wells, the secretary of state in New Jersey, over not only Obama's name on the 2008 election ballot but those of two others, Sen. John McCain and Roger Calero.

[CapnJack]

“A perfectly legal, computer printed birth certificate will be produced. Logical explanations will be offered. The One is about to rule.”

Precisely. Thank God someone understands how things in politics work.

[null and void]

Hmmmmmm. I bet as a US Senator State is required to give him a diplomatic passport. Your theory lives!

[Nipfan]

“I’m sure they would note how little interest in pursuing this exists among the media,...”

This is what really gets me. Where does the media get off DECIDING these things for us? Because they as good as decided the election. Something is very, very wrong.

[wmfights]

Something is very, very wrong.

We are in bizzaro world and have been for awhile. The perpetual adolescents are a majority and truth, integrity, honor, duty, citizenship are all irrelevant terms.

I think it will be corrected, but it will be after the baby boomers are dead and buried. I'm sorry to be one of them.

[Aurorales]

“Could you imagine what would happen if this was actually taken up as a case and if they HAD to rule against obama. The moonbats would go ballistic ... and the Supremes don’t want that to happen.
______________________________
Why is it that everyone who posts this theory never imagines that the reverse might happen if the SC decides in favor of Obama?”
____________________________________________
I agree completely.

I have stated this before so many times. The riots, mobs, thugery, whatever you want to call it that will happen if this issue IS addressed correctly do not bother me in the least.
We should not back down from truth, our laws and the Constitution. No matter what threats are made.

I believe this nation will face repercusions if the “natural born” issue of BO is NOT addressed or is NOT addressed properly (meaning a forgery).

WE THE PEOPLE will need to see whatever document is brought forward to the court. I do not trust anyone in our government who says, “I saw the BC, looks good, nothing to see here, lets move forward”

We all need to see it. Forgery experts who do not work for the government need to see any documents.
WE THE PEOPLE are the most important entities in this whole mess. Our representatives need to remember that.

Yes, there will be problems with us conservatives and anyone else who feels our Constitution is being trampled on and thrown away.
I for one will stand with my fellow Americans and do what needs to be done to set this right.
(I am not talking about rioting, I am not a thug)
I am talking about doing any and all that I am allowed to do under the Constitution.

This will not go away with the usual wave of a hand. I know many of us feel that way.

[penelopesire]

Ping to post 144. Somehow I missed this little ditty reading about this stuff.

Gemsbok...do you have a link to the bill and articles about the bill? Who else co-sponsored it? Who wrote it? This makes Obama and his supporters look even MORE guilty than they already do.

[Aurorales]

“The libs can and will do what ever the hell they want!”
___________________________________________________

NO THEY CAN’T!

When will everyone learn.. The WE THE PEOPLE part of the Constitution.

It is up to US if our government ceases to be true representatives of WE THE PEOPLE.

I believe the second amendment addresses this issue.

I hope you will join us who believe this is vital to our Nation, in demanding our government officials abide by the law.
If we do not fight this with every ounce of courage we have, we might as well line up right now and board the train cars.
Because at the point of letting this go and moving on we have lost everything.

I won’t move on or let this go without a fight.

[seekthetruth]

Donofrio also mentioned this resolution and that even if it had passed it would not have made moot the Constitution because it would not have been an Amendment to the Constitution which would require the states to ratify. Wonder if Obama himself sponsored the resolution? Nice that it did not pass anyway.

[penelopesire]

I sure hope the republicans on capitol hill will be watching like hawks for this kind of subversive law making by Obama and the dems the next 4 years! Makes you wonder sometimes what they have buried in bills in the dead of night already.

[Girlene]

Good points, hoosiermama.

[Girlene]

It's very relevant. If BO was born on US soil, and no longer has Kenyan or British citizenship, then USSC will comment that he has no split loyalty, and will rule in his favor.

I'm not so sure. Here's an interesting argument by Judah Benjamin, Divided Loyalties, Obama’s Eligibility Problem, Part 1. Her line of reasoning goes along with Donofrio's case that Obama is not elegible due to his British citizenship (through his Kenyan father). It is quite long, but has some interesting points about the framer's intent with regard to allegiance and loyalty to the US vs. Britian (or any other country). She also has a part II.

[redgolum]

Not going to happen. The SCOTUS will not start a fire like that.

If this was going to happen, it should have been early in the primaries. To late now.

God help us.

[hoosiermama]

Call the SCOTUS Clerks office this week.. The Clerk said the best way to get their attention is to write them letters. individually.... (Once hear one letter = 10,000 people with similar thought who didn't get round to it.)

With that in mind here's the address and their names to cut and paste.

United States Supreme Court
1 First Street NE Washington DC 20543

The Supreme Court Justices are as follows:

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts
Supreme Court Justice John Stevens
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy
Supreme Court Justice David Souter
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer
Supreme Court Justice Samual Alito

[Flamenco Lady]

There are actually 2 pieces of legislation. The first one was a bill S 2678 introduced by MCaskill on February 28, 2008. According to Senate records this bill was introduced, read twice, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. It appears to have died there, as I can find no further action taken on it.

The second piece of legislation is S. Res. 511. There are three different versions of this bill that were considered, and there may have been more discussion behind the scenes than what actually appears in the Senate record. The final version of this resolution has a suffix of ATS following the resolution #. This version was sponsored by MCaskill, and cosponsored by Senators Leahy, Obama, Coburn, Clinton, and Webb. This resolution was Considered and agreed to on April 30, 2008.

You can look up all the versions of the legislation by going to the Senate website and then following the links to the Thomas record search. I just typed in the term “natural born” and everything came up for me.

As someone stated on one of the threads, Senate Resolutions are not law, just sort of a proclamation by the senate, so they are not really worth much. That said, the final resolution still has some wording that I don’t like. One of the FR threads has the entire piece of legislation that passed on it, but I don’t remember which thread. Perhaps another Freeper remembers where it was posted and can link to the post.

[hoosiermama]

Precisely, And All were honorable men who would not try to manipulate the Constitution of the United States for their own glory and power.

[tpanther]

Not going to happen. The SCOTUS will not start a fire like that.

Nope, you're right. They'll completely ignore the law and objectivity and won't do their jobs.

And at some point in the near future someone will observe all their language about the law and objectivity in their subsequent postulations.

So they will feel good about doing their jobs.

[penelopesire]

Thanks so much. Someone sent me the 511 in Freepmail and I agree, some wording seems designed to ‘clear the path’ so to speak. Sounds like the bill S 2678 is where the rubber meets the road. Just knowing that will help alot in my search.

Thanks again.

[DBrow]

I posted the text here at (I think) 161. It relates only to kids born to military parents overseas, and as far as I can see does not change the definition of natural born, nor does it soften requirements for “naturalized citizens”.

[Windflier]

I believe this nation will face repercusions if the “natural born” issue of BO is NOT addressed or is NOT addressed properly (meaning a forgery).

The repercussions, should justice not prevail, will take many forms. We're talking about a fundamental breakdown of our constitutional, and republican form of government here.

Millions of Americans will question their government's very legitimacy, if this issue is glossed over, or manipulated to allow an illegal usurper to take command of our executive branch.

This condition of doubt will not only affect rank and file citizens, but elected officials, military members, and foreign governments, as well. The shadow of illegitimacy falling onto Obama could well cover the globe. That's how big the potential for harm is in this case.

I would hazard to say that it's already too late, in the minds of many. Given the fact that Obama has obviously chosen obfuscation, evasion, and legal maneuvering to handle this issue instead of simply proving his bona fides to everyone, is all the evidence that many people need.

Connect his performance in this crisis with all of his public statements, his shady associations, and his murky past, and it becomes clear that this man is the very definition of the Manchurian Candidate.

I doubt that we here at FR are the only few who have put all of this together. Certainly, there are millions of Americans who are quietly horrified at what they're witnessing.

I for one will stand with my fellow Americans and do what needs to be done to set this right. (I am not talking about rioting, I am not a thug) I am talking about doing any and all that I am allowed to do under the Constitution.

"What needs to be done" could go beyond what you feel you're "allowed" to do. I take my lead in this issue from the Founders' statements in the Declaration of Independence.

They had to go beyond what was "allowed" to secure the blessings of liberty for us all. So may we.

[seekthetruth]

I wrote a letter to Justice Thomas (certified,receipt requested) as soon as Donofrio posted about the problem with Clerk Beckel(?). Then a few days later I sent a letter to each Justice. I am willing to send another letter to each Justice but now that they have a Conference date set I don't know how much it would accomplish.

Wonder if we all send letters to our respective Secretaries of State asking why all presidential candidates were not checked for constitutional requirements, if that would get their attention. What do you think?