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

To: GovernmentShrinker
And it was a done issue even if he really was born somewhere else...

So we should ignore the U.S. Constitution and forget about having a requirement regarding birth any longer. Well, I'm glad to have that judicial ruling. LOL

56 posted on 06/10/2009 1:02:40 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Obama post 09/11. The U.S. is sorry, we are a Muslim nation, and we surrender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne; VaBthang4

No, we should use the legislative and judicial processes to establish a very clear framework defining “natural born citizen” and establishing what the legal standard of proof is. Without that, pursuing a claim that a particular individual doesn’t meet the definition is a total waste of time, which could only serve to politically destabilize the country, and open the door for explicitly anti-Constitutional forces to take over the country. And I strongly suspect that many of the parties that have been pushing this issue — von Brunn included — are very purposefully trying to do just that, destabilize our government. We become “useful idiots” for the parties engineering the effort, when we jump on board their bandwagon and allow ourselves to be distracted from bigger and more urgently significant issues.

And it would hardly be a victory for the Constitution’s recognition of states’ sovereignty, to have a federal court use standards made up on the spot, to nullify a state government’s official position on whether someone was born in that state and thus acquired US citizenship at birth.


62 posted on 06/10/2009 1:27:31 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | 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