Posted on 10/13/2010 3:04:13 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
On consideration of the Petition for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus and Application for a Stay of Proceedings, the petition is DENIED.
(Excerpt) Read more at caaflog.com ...
Yeah. I gave up. Just read the important comments. From people I like. :)
Thanks for posting page 300. You guys are good capturing images... (like the one posted from google books).. One day maybe I can understand how its done..
Welcome ...
If the Supreme Court of the United States showed any interest in Vattel’s relevance to Article II, Section I then I’d be interested. Thus far, they’ve not shown any interest.
Furthermore in the year and ten months since Inauguration, I haven’t heard a single member of Congress make reference to Vattel during Special Orders speeches when members can talk at length on any issue of importance to the American people.
Again, laughable premises.
To: bushpilot1
Obot jamese..you stated to your comrades on Dr. Conspire site.. “Vattel is an obscure writer..” Jefferson disagrees.. “we have produced proofs from the most enlightened and approved writers on the subject...”
If any AMERICAN Court of Law should ever agree with you that Vattel has any constitutional relevance, then perhaps I’ll pay a bit of attention. Until then...I prefer to continue living in the 21st Century.
CURRENT United States Federal Law: “Nationals and Citizens of the United States At Birth:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
—US Code: Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter III, Part I, Section 1401
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401——000-.html
What these laws refer to are Citizens at birth... meaning they are Born Citizens.
The word “Natural” is not used.
As you well know, Vattel based his’ theories on natural Law as did the Framers of the Declaration of Independence, as follows:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The above speaks to Natural Law flowing from a “creator.”
The “unalienable” Rights are NOT granted by Government but are a NATURAL — unalienable — portion of ALL MEN at birth!
ALL MEN!
These are — in the words of the Framers — UNIVERSAL LAWS!
Vattel — logically — applied the principle of Natural Law to international law.
The Founding Fathers were well grounded in the concept of Natural Law.
Many, including myself, consider The Declaration of Independence (based on Natural law)as foundational to a proper understanding of our Constitution.
Our Natural rights my be “secured” though law tomes and constitutions (see preamble to same)but they are, ultimately — indelibly — the birth right of ALL MEN.
This is the lofty Ideal that America was founded on.
Vattel applied “Natural law” to his Law of Nations.
Vattel did not “invent” the idea of Natural Law... but that he was held in “high and just esteem” among many of the framers of the constitution, is incontrovertible:
Benjamin Franklin to To: Charles William Frederic Dumas
Philadelphia, 9 December, 1775.
I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly that copy, which I kept, (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed,) has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a HIGH and JUST ESTEEM for their author.
(Emphases mine)
STE=Q
LINK BAD SORRY TRY THIS:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401——000-.html
STE=Q
“It will be found in Black:s Reports, vol. 2, page 667, &c. In that decision Justice Grier says:
“They claim to be in arms to establish their liberty and independence, in order to become a sovereign State, while the sovereign party treats them as insurgents and rebels, who owe allegiance, and who should be punished with death for their treason.”
That he states to be their status. Then he goes on to quote Vattel:
<” A civil war,7 says Vattel, ‘breaks the bands of society and government, or at least suspends their force and effect; it produces in the nation two independent parties, who consider each other as enemies, and acknowledge no common judge. These two parties therefore, must necessarily be considered as constituting, at least for a time, two separate bodies, two distinct societies.”
DEBATES
OF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
OF THE
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Assembled at the City of Annapolis, Wednesday, April 27,1864:
BEING A FULL AND COMPLETE REPORT OF THE DEBATES AND PROCEED-
INGS OF THE CONVENTION, TOGETHER WITH THE OLD CONSTI-
TUTION, THE LAW UNDER WHICH THE CONVENTION
ASSEMBLED, AND THE NEW CONSTITUTION.
Official:
WM. BLAIR LORD, Reporter—HENRY M. PARKHURST, Assistant.
Time for another Troll Tax. “Vattel an obscure writer.”(jamese777)
We know your agenda. Prop up an illegal Obama and discredit Vattel because of natural born citizen and born to a citizen father stated in Vattels Law of Nations.
ROFLMAO you do realize how foolish you look to everyone else but jamese777, don’t you?
A series of actions including the Stamp Act (1765), the Townsend Acts (1767) and the Boston Massacre (1770) agitated the colonists, straining relations with the mother country. But it was the Crown's attempt to tax tea that spurred the colonists to action and laid the groundwork for the American Revolution.
You realize how foolish birthers look every time they step into a court, don’t you?
No, I realize how standing was not in place when the Constitution was made and Presidential eligibility was made. The fact that standing is now being used to try and thwart the people who are trying to enforce the eligibility requirements is what is foolish to me. People like you who claim to be patriots who do the same look foolish to me.
I have no idea what “Please don’t blow the flour out of your mouth at the same time!!!” means. Care to explain it?
I wouldn't expect your great intellect would understand a well known saying from the "old" country. Meaning a lying and distorting person is like someone who has his/her mouth full of white flour and want to speak and blow at same time, which is impossible, LOL!!
Now remember to spit out the flour before speaking:....!!!
Neither the 14th Amendment nor Wong Kim Ark make one a Natural Born Citizen In defining what an Article II “natural born Citizen” is, we do not seek to read into the Constitution that which was not intended and written there by the Framers. Despite popular belief, the Fourteenth Amendment does not convey the status of “natural born Citizen” in its text nor in its intent. Some add an implication to the actual wording of the Fourteenth Amendment by equating the amendment’s “citizen” to Article II’s “natural born Citizen.” But nowhere does the 14th Amendment confer “natural born citizen” status. The words simply do not appear there, but some would have us believe they are implied. But the wording of the Amendment is clear in showing that it confers citizenship only and nothing more.
The intent and purpose of the amendment was to provide equal citizenship to all Americans either born on U.S. soil or naturalized therein and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It does not grant “natural born Citizen” status. It only confers “citizen” status, as that is the exact word used by the Amendment itself and that is the same word that appears in Article I, II, III, and IV of the Constitution. It just conveys the status of “citizen,” and as we learned from how the Framers handled the Naturalization Acts of 1790 and 1795, being a “citizen” does not necessarily mean that one is a “natural born Citizen.”
The Fourteenth Amendment only tells us who may become members of the community called the United States, i.e., those born on U.S. soil or naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are U.S. citizens. The amendment was needed because under Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856), slaves and their descendents, whether free or not, were not considered as being members of that community even though born on U.S. soil and unlike the American Indians subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the amendment only allowed these slaves and their descendents to become a member of the U.S. community by making them U.S. citizens. Once those persons or anybody else (e.g. Wong Kim Ark) so became a member of the U.S. community (became a U.S. citizen by birth on U.S. soil or through naturalization), then that person could join with another U.S. citizen and procreate a child on U.S. soil who would then be an Article II "natural born Citizen."
Hence, during the Founding, the original citizens created the new Constitutional Republic. Through Article II’s grandfather clause, they were allowed to be President. Their posterity would be the "natural born Citizens" who would perpetuate the new nation and its values. These “natural born Citizens,” born after the adoption of the Constitution, would be the future Presidents.
Subsequently, a “natural born Citizen” was created by someone first becoming a member of the United States (a U.S. citizen) by birth on its soil to a mother and father who were U.S. citizens or if not so born then through naturalization, and then joining with another similarly created U.S. citizen to procreate a child on U.S. soil. The product of that union would be an Article II “natural born Citizen.”
After the Fourteenth Amendment, it became sufficient to be a citizen if one were merely born on U.S. soil or naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. That U.S. citizen would then procreate with another similarly created U.S citizen and produce a “natural born Citizen.”
As we can see, becoming a U.S. citizen is only the first step in the process of creating a “natural born Citizen.” The second step is the two U.S citizens procreating a child on U.S. soil. It is these “natural born Citizens” who can someday be President or Vice President of the United States. Stated differently, a President must be a second generation American citizen by both U.S. citizen parents. A Senator or Representative can be a first generation American citizen by naturalization or birth. It is the extra generation carried by a President which assures the American people that he/she is born with attachment and allegiance only to the United States.
The issue of what the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote “natural born Citizen” into Article II is surely ripe for the U.S. Supreme Court to determine. The issue is one of first impression and the Supreme Court needs to decide it. The national security and survival of the United States as conceived by the Founders are at stake. Because of the utter failure of our political and media institutions to give proper and honest attention to this issue, only the highest court in the land can now come to the aid of the Kerchner plaintiffs and We the People.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
Time for another Troll Tax. “Vattel an obscure writer.”(jamese777)
If Bammy can sideline the “CREATOR” (in the declaration of independence)it follows that Jamese can call “Vattel an obscure writer.”
It’s only “logical” you know. :)
STE=Q
Then you missed his photos in full combat gear, especially with Knee-Pads on he has never taken off, more LOL!!!
Maybe you can get this, using BOR’s phrase, PINHEAD, to re-post his photos from the “war-Zone,”(?) then you’ll see the real fool???
Just because you feel a grievance doesn’t mean you have a case. And just because a handful of people agree doesn’t mean you have a case. This isn’t peculiar to Obama, but a long standing principle of American law. Wiki has a concise article here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_%28law%29
But all you would need to do to force a court case would be to have a state legislature or DA or SecState rule that having two citizen parents is required for being placed on the presidential ballot. The moment you do that, the other states would have to sue to prevent different standards being placed on federal candidates.
The problem is that you haven’t been able to convince anyone to make such a ruling or pass such a law. Nor have you been able to convince the Supreme Court that they need to step in on this issue.
So you can call me names, and say my arguments have no legal merit, but I’ll merely respond that every state & every Congressman and every court to date agrees with my legal theory and disagrees with yours. And that is hard to deny.
THEY DID NOT GIVE UP
***
“Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better.”
~ Samuel Beckett
As a young man, Abraham Lincoln went to war a captain and returned a private. Afterwards, he was a failure as a businessman. As a lawyer in Springfield, he was too impractical and temperamental to be a success. He turned to politics and was defeated in his first try for the legislature, again defeated in his first attempt to be nominated for congress, defeated in his application to be commissioner of the General Land Office, defeated in the senatorial election of 1854, defeated in his efforts for the vice-presidency in 1856, and defeated in the senatorial election of 1858.
At about that time, he wrote in a letter to a friend, “I am now the most miserable man living. If what I feel were equally distributed to the whole human family, there would not be one cheerful face on the earth.”
.
Winston Churchill failed sixth grade. He was subsequently defeated in every election for public office until he became Prime Minister at the age of 62. He later wrote, “Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never - in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never, Never, Never, Never give up.” (his capitals, mind you)
.
Socrates was called “an immoral corrupter of youth” and continued to corrupt even after a sentence of death was imposed on him. He drank the hemlock and died corrupting.
.
Sigmund Freud was booed from the podium when he first presented his ideas to the scientific community of Europe. He returned to his office and kept on writing.
.
Robert Sternberg received a C in his first college introductory-psychology class. His teacher commented that “there was a famous Sternberg in psychology and it was obvious there would not be another.” Three years later Sternberg graduated with honors from Stanford University with exceptional distinction in psychology, summa cum laude, and Phi Beta Kappa. In 2002, he became President of the American Psychological Association.
.
Charles Darwin gave up a medical career and was told by his father, “You care for nothing but shooting, dogs and rat catching.” In his autobiography, Darwin wrote, “I was considered by all my masters and my father, a very ordinary boy, rather below the common standard of intellect.” Clearly, he evolved.
.
Thomas Edison’s teachers said he was “too stupid to learn anything.” He was fired from his first two jobs for being “non-productive.” As an inventor, Edison made 1,000 unsuccessful attempts at inventing the light bulb. When a reporter asked, “How did it feel to fail 1,000 times?” Edison replied, “I didn’t fail 1,000 times. The light bulb was an invention with 1,000 steps.”
.
“Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising every time we fall.”
~ Confucius
.
Albert Einstein did not speak until he was 4-years-old and did not read until he was 7. His parents thought he was “sub-normal,” and one of his teachers described him as “mentally slow, unsociable, and adrift forever in foolish dreams.” He was expelled from school and was refused admittance to the Zurich Polytechnic School. He did eventually learn to speak and read. Even to do a little math.
.
Louis Pasteur was only a mediocre pupil in undergraduate studies and ranked 15th out of 22 students in chemistry.
.
Henry Ford failed and went broke five times before he succeeded.
.
R. H. Macy failed seven times before his store in New York City caught on.
.
F. W. Woolworth was not allowed to wait on customers when he worked in a dry goods store because, his boss said, “he didn’t have enough sense.”
.
When Bell telephone was struggling to get started, its owners offered all their rights to Western Union for $100,000. The offer was disdainfully rejected with the pronouncement, “What use could this company make of an electrical toy.”
.
John Garcia, who eventually was honored for his fundamental psychological discoveries, was once told by a reviewer of his often-rejected manuscripts that one is no more likely to find the phenomenon he discovered than to find bird droppings in a cuckoo clock. (sort of a cute critique actually)
.
Rocket scientist Robert Goddard found his ideas bitterly rejected by his scientific peers on the grounds that rocket propulsion would not work in the rarefied atmosphere of outer space.
.
Daniel Boone was once asked by a reporter if he had ever been lost in the wilderness. Boone thought for a moment and replied, “No, but I was once bewildered for about three days.”
Rest here
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/efficacynotgiveup.html
You NEVER, ever give up, when your goal is principled.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq. ...now THERE is a lawyer to cite!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK. Let me know when he wins one of these cases. In the meantime, it seems courts have concluded that WKA DID provide a definition of NBC...you just don’t like the outcome.
“I wouldn’t expect your great intellect would understand a well known saying from the “old” country.”
My family came from the “old country” in 1721. I guess we forgot some of the ‘old ways’.
“Then you missed his photos in full combat gear, especially with Knee-Pads on he has never taken off, more LOL!!!”
I’m not ashamed of spending my 49th birthday in Afghanistan. As best anyone could tell, I was the oldest guy on the FOB - where I spent the vast majority of my time. I also patrolled the skies over Iraq, and was getting shot at when most Americans had no idea any shooting was taking place. You can call that shameful, but I’m glad I did it.
And it was because I deployed so often that I despise those who refuse to deploy, particularly on the stupid grounds that refusing will somehow gain access to Obama’s birth certificate and show he was born in Kenya. That is why I first started posting on these threads - although I’ll give Lakin credit for having the courage of his convictions. Unlike the birthers who post a lot, but continue to obey all those laws illegally signed by an impostor president since 20 Jan 2009. If you believe Lakin is right, then you should join with him and publicly refuse to obey any law signed by Obama...
Mario lost credibility when he wrote those 2 sentences. The 14th grants no such citizenship per the framers of the amendment via congressional records. If Mario put those opinions of his in any of his court docs, he undermined his entire pleading.
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.