You’re welcome. Thank you for your civility as well. I’ve enjoyed the dialog.
If you can find officials who can be convinced of your interpretation of nationality and citizenship, I will be most impressed.
By the way, none of the people who had standing to challenge Barack Obama’s eligibility because they could show DIRECT injury from him being elected filed suit against him. Those people who would have been granted standing are John McCain, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and/or the Republican National Committee on their behalf.
The first lawsuit in the 2008 election cycle (March, 2008) to be dismissed on standing grounds was Hollander v McCain in which a New Hampshire Republican Primary voter named Fred Hollander sued John McCain and the Republican National Committee due to McCain’s birth outside of the U.S.
This was months before any court challenge to Obama. The Republicans got the case dismissed on the grounds that Hollander did not have standing to bring suit.
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/hollanderv.mccain.php
That's why pointing to decisions is such a silly argument. The Founders never intended for the Law to be so convoluted that only a select few had the 'right' to interpret it's meaning. In legal terms, a government edict is void for vagueness if a reasonable person of at least average intelligence could not determine what elements constitute the crime.
----
From the last Motion to Dismiss at your link-
Those born “in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” U.S. Const., amend. XIV, have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 674-75 (1898), and thus eligible for the presidency, see, e.g., Schneider v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163, 165 (1964)
So this knowledge of native born despite alien parentage concept was so well known since the time of the founding, it couldn't be found quoted closer than OVER A HUNDRED AND TWENTY ONE YEARS after-the-fact?
And don't even start with the "Blackstone said it meant born in England". I've read the original text, and it says much MORE than that.
The second cite is after the federal government decided in the 50's it could incorporate the Constitution with the laws of the States AND just prior to Kennedy's Immigration Act in the 60's that was the justification of our entire 'anchor-baby flood. There's nothing legitimate there - fruit of the poisoned tree and all that. No, it was just more administrative law... crawling slowly forward and incrementally consuming the Original Intent of the Constitution than was meant to protect our Rights.
---
No, you go on believing whatever you will. For me, though, I'll think I'll stick with Madison:
"A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
James Madison to W. T. Barry August 4, 1822
It was only an expression of my determination to believe what my own eyes tell me instead of what's dictated to me by political overlords.
Again...I am SO sorry if you thought I was being insulting.
Have a great weekend!
By the way, none of the people who had standing to challenge Barack Obama’s eligibility because they could show DIRECT injury from him being elected filed suit against him.I realize that this is the interpretation of the marxists and cowards in the judiciary, but anyone with a lick of common sense knows in their bones that a bogus president usurping the presidency directly injures each and every citizen. You, me and every sovereign citizen has an individual right to be served by a legitimate president -- that a usurper denies all of us that right is the first direct injury.
The next direct injury occurs with his first putative act that directly restricts, reduces or adversely affects the rights a citizen. A usurper inflicts those injuries only upon the individuals directly affected, but by now aka obama has probably caused direct damage to almost everyone in the USA. Lack of standing in this case is a cruel, conspiratorial tyranny of the judicial lapdogs of the power brokers in DC and beyond.