Posted on 11/28/2008 9:26:02 AM PST by Deepest End
No. 08A469 Title: Cort Wrotnowski, Applicant v. Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State
Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Connecticut Case Nos.: (SC 18264)
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nov 25 2008 Application (08A469) for stay and/or injunction, submitted to Justice Ginsburg. Nov 26 2008 Application (08A469) denied by Justice Ginsburg.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioner: Cort Wrotnowski 1057 North Street (202) 862-8554 Greenwich, CT 06831 Party name: Cort Wrotnowski Attorneys for Respondent: Richard Blumenthal Attorney General (860) 808-5316 Office of the Attorney General 55 Elm Street P.O. Box 120 Hartford, CT 06141-0120 Party name: Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State
When/where did Pelosi say this?
Keyes has a good case, aside from standing, strong CA precedent. Some speculation it may have traction at the CA SC level. But you are probably right none-the-less.
It was on Plains Radio last night with Cort. Leo then called in and was on for TWO Hours! It was awesome. In the last two nights Leo had two callers call in with great legal research that was on point and very helpful.
Supposedly Pelosi is trying to inject herself into the debate by saying that based on sec of state that Obama is eligble. I did not search Google News to verify it.
Leo asked Ed Hale at Plains radio to post last night’s show to Plains archive because Leo wanted to review it and take notes. great research was coming out on the 14th Amendment and other issues.
Scalia on CSpan at a speech after Leo’s case was filed was also illuminating. Leo was saying it was weird because he was reading Federalist papers research, Scalia came on giving a speech at the Federalist Society after Leo’s case was filed.
You have two battles going on that are interesting. OBots trying to silence, attack or shut down Leo’s web sites and his case. Constitutionalist citizens using the net to find research to help Leo’s case.
I think that this Resolution 511 should be hung around the neck of every Senator who will be voting to accept the electoral votes in January as these cases are moving through the court system.
Plains Radio last night with Leo and Cort. Leo told Ed Hale last night to post the archive ASAP because Leo was staying up late to relisten and take notes. Leo has been working 20 hour days on this from wha he has said.
Persons born in the United States, and persons born on foreign soil to two U.S. parents, are born American citizens and are classified as citizens at birth under 8 USC 1401. They are native born citizens and don't have to go through any naturalization process.
Since there is no clear cut definition of what constitutes a natual born citizen in the Constitution and there have been no SCOTUS decisions that clearly define it, I would assume that common practice and laws would heavily influence any decision. I seriously doubt that SCOTUS would try to change jus solis, i.e., birthright citizenship without any real Constitutional basis to do so. I think it would require a constitutional amendment to change it in much the same way Ireland did it.
Resolution 511 is just that, a resolution. It is not law.
It is an outrage. The Legislative should not be trying to influence elections or pick canidates. Leo blamed the DNC and GOP too.
I do not like Hillary but Obama’s goons “fixed” the caucases to insure that she would lose and Obama was helped by the MSM.
John McCain was not born on US soil, but he was born of two US citizen parents, which would make him natural born under current US statues.
“Obama most likely is ineligible as is McCain.”
Why would you think John McCain is ineligible? He was born to American parents while on duty assignment in a foreign country. To have declared a non-citizen would be to disenfranchise a whole lot of people and would completely eliminate any family assignments on foreign soil.
My only concenrs with the keys case is the CA courts may try to drag it out plus i hope they raise some money to beef up their legal team. Orly and Gary Kreep are good people but I am not sure if they are up to it. Having said that - the CA bar exam is one of the hardest in the nation. They passed the CA bar so they have to be pretty sharp.
Fasten your seatbelt. This may get a little bumpy.
Yes, I recall that now. But I believe that under the laws at the time, he was still considered natural born because of the military status of his parents, and that they were both American citizens — unlike the One.
I have read most the arguments, which are pure speculation. The Wong case seems to set the precedent for birthright citizenship. The Constitution does not provide an explicit definition of natural born, especially as it applies to the Presidency. No one knows what SCOTUS would decide since the issue has never been raised to that level legally.
Thanks.
I agree with you that the downside to the CA case is the potential it will get drug out for some time. Another reason I don’t see it going to SCOTUS any time soon.
I and apparently Leo are not trying to take McCain’s right away but based on the interpretation he may not be natural born. I do not think it is clear cut. I am not an attorney. Leo said it may not be right but the Constitution may deny McCain. It is the Framers intent.
Seeing McCain’s actions post-election with Lindsay Graham sucking up to Obama i will not waste much time on McCain. My guess is they are working on an amnesty deal already. I think McCain was Soros plan B.
This was what was largely discussed last night for 2 hours by Leo on Plains Radio. The co-author of teh 14th said it should be 2 American born parents. The framers had issues with the idea of one or two foreign citizens having a baby who might be an “agent” for a foreign country. Specifically at the time - the UK.
They discussed a case, opinion or writing by Stevens on this issue I think with a recent terrorist Gitmo case. Leo and other volunteers are trying to find cases, federalist Papers writings and other things to support this position.
Some fellow called last night and told Leo that it was clear as the nose on your face in which Leo said it was not clear cut.
If you are interested, Plains Radio should have the archive to last night’s show posted. It started at 9 pm with Cort and Leo jumped on about 10 pm and went til Midnight.
Don’t you find it odd that not one judge has sup’d the COLB?
“I have read most the arguments, which are pure speculation. The Wong case seems to set the precedent for birthright citizenship. The Constitution does not provide an explicit definition of natural born, especially as it applies to the Presidency. No one knows what SCOTUS would decide since the issue has never been raised to that level legally.”
No, but the Constitution does differentiate. The Wong case, IMO, is not pertinent as it pertains to US citizenship. You are correct however that SCOTUS will have to decide. It is all speculation at this point (mine and yours included), the real question ... how will they decide? And furthermoe, will we have an enforceable Constitution after it is over?
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.