It was not necessary to define commonly understood words. Judging by this law book owned by John Adams, I would say the English law definition is pretty apparent.
Posted on 11/16/2011 6:31:19 PM PST by circumbendibus
A hearing is scheduled in front of the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission on Friday to hear a complaint filed by Orly Taitz, with the apparent support of two state lawmakers, that raises allegations of fraudulent documents and fraudulent Social Security Number use on the part of Barack Obama.
The hearing is scheduled Friday at 2 p.m. in Room 307 of the New Hampshire Legislative Office Building and Taitz is encouraging the public to be present.
The state holds the first primary for presidential elections, and that is scheduled for Jan. 10, 2012.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
This is the wrong approach. Wong Kim Ark said NBCs were excluded from the citizen clause of the 14th amendment and it cited Minor’s UNANIMOUS definition of natural-born citizen to affirm this exclusion. Under Wong Kim Ark, NBC = all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens.
There was a reason why the Dmocratic Party sent operatives to Indonesia to buy up all the government records on Barry Soetoro/Barak H. Obama II AND all the Soetoro family photographs they could find.
The records indicate who was where, and when. The photos show what they looked like and, most importantly, how many were there at one the time.
Are you beginning to see where I’m going with this?
Yes, I know all that.
I realize I’m butting in (perhaps naively) on a contentious exchange, but I *think* that Lmo56 is on the same page, here. He/She appears to be saying that “Obama” supporters point to WKA as conferring NBC on “Obama” but that it does nothing of the kind.
Just sayin’. Maybe I read the commentary wrong.
If Orly Taitz indeed is running for the U.S. Senate from California, it’s against Diane Feinstein; Barbara Boxer was reelected in 2010, so her seat isn’t up until 2016.
The people of New Hampshire are too busy dealing with a bloody crime wave to be worrying about this right now, I’m afraid.
My understanding is the age requirement only applies if the child is born outside the country. If born *inside* the country, a child acquires citizenship through the action of the 14th amendment. (as currently misinterpreted to apply to the children of aliens too.)
And Alfred E. Newman is the dad? Sorry to be sarcastic but I'm gonna have to read this several more times so I can TRY to get it straight in my mind. "Holy Smokes" indeed.
I also see no evidence for some of these broader claims. As I currently understand the evidence I have seen, Stanley Ann Dunham is doubtlessly Barry's mother. His Father is not so certain, but I have no doubts about his mother. I don't think trying to link Malcom X with Barry is useful.
It was not necessary to define commonly understood words. Judging by this law book owned by John Adams, I would say the English law definition is pretty apparent.
Earlier in this thread, Lmo56 said, “HOWEVER, that DOES NOT settle the “natural-born citizen” [NBC] question since it HAS NEVER been EXACTLY defined in the Constitution [or its amendments], nor by SCOTUS ruling.” We have at least TWO landmark SCOTUS rulings that did define natural-born citizen. This is why I’m addressing the confusion about dicta and holding. WKA arrived at a conclusion that Ark was a citizen under the 14th amendment because he could NOT declare him to be a natural-born citizen under the definition that was cited from the Minor decision. This is an example of stare decisis, not dicta. Justice Gray looked at previous Supreme Court decisions and how each addressed the subject clause of the 14th amendment. Gray satisfied the subject clause by including a permanent residence and domicil requirement that was formed by the lengthy review of common law. Gray made a few errors, but along the way, he clearly defined NBC and upheld a decision that was unanimous in defining the term and in rejecting the 14th amendment as applying to NBCs.
I agree. I originally started to chastise him as well, but upon reading further into his commentary I realized he was saying that the Decision in Wong Kim Ark did NOT confer NBC status on Mr. Wong. He is on the same page as we.
Soros is not pleased.
too bad we no longer have a representative government
We need to do whatever it takes to truly “clean the swamp” and put in place a government of representatives who are dedicated to our country and our constitution and self serving, egomanics who are there to become millionaires on our dime.
Lmo56 contends that Wong Kim Ark, who was a citizen by the 14th Amendment BUT was never a natural born citizen, was indeed NBC because of the 14th Amendment.
He/she is a liar. That claim is patently false.
The Wong Kim Ark case NEVER said any such thing. WKA had no more eligibility to run for president than any anchor baby born here in the USA today!
A person born in the USA of citizen parents is a NBC per M v. H; that is a holding, setting precedent, per the US Supreme Court.
I can’t even begin to explain how that pisses off Obama’s supporters.
IIRC, the age requirement for the mother applies only for children born outside the US.
And the two parent citizenship requirement came to be considered canon only after three years of the BHO being born in Kenya canon never got anywhere.
OK, do you know with any certainty who GWB’s parents are?
bump
Calm down, SD. Lmo IS on the same page here. The end of his original post that started the uproar in fact states:
THEREFORE, those AGAINST Obama consider him to be a citizen under the 14th Amendment - but CANNOT be a natural-born citizen.Nowhere in that post did lmo make any claim that BHO is NBC because of the 14th.
Please be careful before jumping on allies.
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.