Posted on 05/12/2014 8:52:33 AM PDT by Sam Troy
a 42-year-old freshman senator, but when asked by Jonathan Karl on “This Week” if he’s ready to be president, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida answered without hesitation.
“I do … but I think that’s true for multiple other people that would want to run … I mean, I’ll be 43 this month, but the other thing that perhaps people don’t realize, I’ve served now in public office for the better part of 14 years,” said Rubio. “Most importantly, I think a president has to have a clear vision of where the country needs to go and clear ideas about how to get it there and I think we’re very blessed in our party to have a number of people that fit that criteria.”
When asked if he was qualified to run, Rubio reiterated that the Republican Party has several qualified candidates.
“The question is what — who’s vision is the one that our party wants to follow?” he said.
Rubio – who spoke to Karl on Friday in New Hampshire — said that if he decides to seek the presidency, he would not simultaneously seek re-election as a senator for the Sunshine State.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Thanks
Over many decades, the other two branches of government, the legislative and the executive, have, for some inexplicable reason, acquiesced to the notion of judicial supremacy – a dangerously dominant concept that erroneously regards the United States Supreme Court as the final arbiter of all things public policy. If this is so, then these nine men and women are ultimately unaccountable to anyone or anything, and the other two branches of government are but toothless figurehead bodies merely spinning their wheels while spending our dollars.
This flies in the face of the framers’ intent. It’s also the very unfortunate reality under which we live. It is fully within the constitutional authority of the other two branches of government to rein in these judges gone wild, but, regrettably, no one, as of yet, seems to have the mettle to do what needs to be done.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3155052/posts
And Nero, that's what a CONSERVATIVE Opinion of the judiciary looks like. You seem completely unfamiliar with the fact that Conservatives detest the Judicial system because they rightfully see it as completely out of whack with original intent and even basic common sense.
You may be bewildered as to why no one takes your cites of court cases seriously, well that's because conservatives simply think the court system is broken, and generally incapable of doing anything competently. They are like retarded children, but children who hold power.
Glad I could help your day lj, I knew KB would get it but wasn’t sure about others...
The Founders made provision to alter their original thinking on any issue via the constitutional amendment process. They made it extremely difficult but not impossible to amend the Constitution.
One of the most important issues that the Founders and Framers debated and eventually compromised over was direct election of U.S. Senators. The Founders decided against it. The Founders decided that the House of Representatives would be popularly elected (democracy) and the Senate (from the Latin word “Senex” meaning “elder” or “wise old man”) would be indirectly elected by state legislatures (republicanism). However in 1913, the thinking of the Founders was changed by the 17th Amendment to the Constitution which provided for direct election of the U.S. Senators.
It is an analogous situation with the 14th Amendment which created only two forms of U.S. citizenship: born citizenship and naturalized citizenship. Since 1865, “Citizens of the United States at birth” and “natural born citizens” have been synonymous.
I hope he isn’t legal to run...
“Ineligible candidates elected by unqualified voters, resulting in illegitimate government. That’s the way America rolls these days.”
“People deserve the leaders they get”
I think that you need to run your position by those who are actually in the natural born citizenship/ineligibility movement. I have no personal investment in resolving this debate through the courts.
On the issue of presidential eligibility, more than 200 lawsuits and more than 100 state and federal appeals have been filed. The judicial branch has been the overwhelming first choice of branch of state and federal government that has been utilized by challengers to presidential eligibility.
My personal opinion is that the executive branch of state governments, through the Chief Elections Officer in each state (usually the Secretary of State) and the legislative branch, through new legislation which would have changed the process and the requirements for qualifying in each state for the ballot as a natural born citizen, was the way to resolve this debate once and for all.
The Ineligibility Movement has never been able to interest enough conservative Governors or conservative state legislators in this issue.
good luck with that RubioRino
Please provide specific citation if I’m incorrect in my understanding that NO lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility have been “adjudicated”. All have been discarded in the initial stages as “having no standing”. In other words, none has been through the “legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation including legal reasoning set forth by opposing parties to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved”.
I look forward to seeing your list of 200+ challenges which have been adjudicated, and which, apparently - from what you intimate - found Obama to be Constitutionally eligible for the office of President.
Thank you.
at birth, he was a US citizen by virtue of being born on US soil... and Cuban by being born to two Cuban citizens
a natural born citizen is a citizen naturally, as there are no alternatives.
since he had two options, he’s native born but not natural born (like myself)
Yes, it's utter nonsense to think that the court which gave us "Separate But Equal", could have two different standards of citizenship.
(And the 14th amendment was passed in 1868, not 1865.)
Thanks for the typo correction.
Wow, you don’t ask for much do you! :-)
First, ANY legal action that ends in a court order has been adjudicated. An order of dismissal is still an adjudication. If someone sued you and the judge dismisses their complaint, did you win?
However there have also been actual trials on the merits in Obama eligibility court actions as well.
From Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary:
Definition of ADJUDICATION
1: the act or process of adjudicating
2a: a judicial decision or sentence
One of the most well-known eligibility trials on the merits was the military court martial of Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin, M.D. who challenged Obama’s Commander-in-Chief status. There was a jury of eight U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonels in that trial.
Here are some excerpts from court orders in Obama eligibility
adjudications:
A “trial on the merits” in New Jersey, a part of which is still available as a You Tube video: Purpura & Moran v. Obama: New Jersey Administrative Law Judge Jeff S. Masin: “No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.” April 10, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/88936737/2012-04-10-NJ-Purpura-Moran-v-Obama-Initial-Decision-of-ALJ-Masin-Apuzzo
A “trial on the merits” in Georgia where the plaintiffs were offered a default judgement because Obama’s attorney refused to show up but the plaintiffs rejected the default judgement in favor of a trial with exhibits and witnesses.
Swensson, Powell, Farrar and Welden v. Obama, Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili, State of Georgia Administrative Hearings: “For the purposes of this analysis, the Court considered that Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Ankeny, he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen. Accordingly, President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary under O.C.G.A. under Section 21-2-5(b). February 3, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/80424508/Swensson-Powell-Farrar-Welden-vs-Obama-Judge-Michael-Malihi-s-Final-Order-Georgia-Ballot-Access-Challenge-2-3-12
Allen v. Obama, Arizona Superior Court Judge Richard E. Gordon: “Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”—Pima County Superior Court, Tuscon, Arizona, March 7, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/84531299/AZ-2012-03-07-Allen-v-Obama-C20121317-ORDER-Dismissing-Complaint
Rhodes v. MacDonald, U.S. District Court Judge Clay D. Land: “A spurious claim questioning the president’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, September 16, 2009.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19809978/RHODES-v-MacDONALD-13-ORDER-denying-3-Motion-for-TRO-granting-8-Motion-to-Dismiss-Ordered-by-Judge-Clay-D-Land-on-09162009-CGC-Entered-0
Voeltz v. Obama, Judge Terry P. Lewis, Leon County, Florida Circuit Court Judge: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion.”—June 29, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/99025994/FL-2012-06-29-Voeltz-v-Obama-order-dismissing-amended-complaint
If you are really interested, it might be instructive to read the entire court order in the very first Obama eligibility civil action to be adjudicated, Berg v. Obama:
http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/08d1256p.pdf
Finally, if you want a listing (with links) to all 220 original jurisdiction rulings,
90 appellate rulings and 25 SCOTUS rulings, there’s a “birther scorecard.”
http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%20CASE%20LIST.pdf
However since some of these rulings are now four, five and six years old, the links don’t always still work, however you can use your favorite search engine to search on the name of any of the lawsuits.
The scorecard includes a string of citations for all of the adjudicated court actions on this issue: http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%2520STRING%2520CITE.pdf
I hope this helps.
The more germane case before the Suprmeme Court this week is Paige v. Vermont.
Paige’s lawyer is Mario Apuzzo who is famous for the two-citizen parent theory. Their petition is here:
Both Vogt and Paige are scheduled for the conference on the 15th. The results (probably denials) will be released on the 19th.
Although Putin does qualify as a Natural Born Citizen under the new rules, must you go quite so far? I can get you Raúl Castro just 90 miles from Miami. The money we save on air fares alone could help pay Karl Rove.
Besides, it could help the GOP attract Hispanic voters. You'll think about it?
Ping
No he is not eligible. Just like Barack O, both his parents were not American Citizens. There are many things about barry Satorroh(sp?) that are different. His lack of a valid SS card and # and the fa ct that BO was a British Citizen at birth. But Mario is not a Natural Born Citizen as the Supremem Court and the framers defined it.
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.