Posted on 08/27/2024 11:35:04 AM PDT by CDR Kerchner
(Aug. 27, 2024) — Well, whatta ya know. Yet another source – this time an established, tax-exempt IRS “527 Organization” rather than an individual human being – raises the issue of the likely compromised “natural born Citizen” (“nbC”) bona fides of Kamala Devi Harris. The National Federation of Republican Assemblies (“NFRA”) has brought the issue back into the public square with its 39-page “Platform and Policy Document” directly questioning Harris’s constitutional eligibility.
As a preliminary matter, the story of the NFRA Platform and Policy Document appears in the online version of “The Independent,” a left-leaning media outlet based in London…., hardly a “go-to” resource for gaining accurate information about the nbC issue under the U.S. Constitution. For example, The Independent article erroneously claims that, under the NFRA policy document, U.S. presidents Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Madison would be disqualified. Not so: the “Citizen-Grandfather” exception that the Framers included took care of that. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Please explain the following:
Lex domicilii, a Latin term, refers to the law of the country where a person resides permanently. It determines a person’s legal rights by establishing their domicile, which is the place where they have their permanent home and intend to return to after any temporary absence.
In conflict of laws, habitual residence is the standard used to determine the law which should be applied to determine a given legal dispute or entitlement. It can be contrasted with the law on domicile, traditionally used in common law jurisdictions to do the same thing.
Habitual residence is less demanding than domicile and the focus is more on past experience rather than future intention. There is normally only one habitual residence where the individual usually resides and routinely returns to after visiting other places. It is the geographical place considered "home" for a reasonably significant period of time.
Domicile. A person's legal home. That place where a man has his true, fixed, and permanent home and principal establishment, and to which whenever he is absent he has the intention of returning. Smith v. Smith, 206 Pa.Super. 310, 213 A.2d 94. Generally, physical presence within a state and the intention to make it one's home are the requisites of establishing a "domicile" therein. Montoya v. Collier, 85 N.M. 356, 512 P.2d 684, 686. The permanent residence of a person or the place to which he intends to return even though he may actually reside elsewhere. A person may have more than one residence but only one domicile. The legal domicile of a person is important since it, rather than the actual residence, often controls the jurisdiction of the taxing authorities and determines where a person may exercise the privilege of voting and other legal rights and privileges. The established, fixed, permanent, or ordinary dwelling, place or place of residence of a person, as distinguished from his temporary and transient, though actual, place of residence. It is his legal residence, as distinguished from his temporary place of abode; or his home, as distinguished from a place to which business or pleasure may temporarily call him.
"Citizenship," "habitancy," and "residence" are severally words which in particular cases may mean precisely the same as "domicile," while in other uses may have different meanings.
"Residence" signifies living in particular locality while "domicile" means living in that locality with intent to make it a fixed and permanent home. Schreiner v. Schreiner, Tex.Civ.App., 502 S.W.2d 840, 843.
For purpose of federal diversity jurisdiction, "citizenship" and "domicile" are synonymous. Hendry v. Masonite Corp., C.A.Miss., 455 F.2d 955.
Domicile of origin. The home of the parents. That which arises from a man's birth and connections. The domicile of the parents at the time of birth, or what is termed the "domicile of origin," constitutes the domicile of an infant, and continues until abandoned, or until the acquisition of a new domicile in a different place. Struble v. Struble, Tex.Civ.App., 177 S.W.2d 279, 283.
Domicile of origin is established by law at birth to every individual. It refers to the domicile of the person's parent, and is hard for the person to lose. This means that it is not necessarily established based on where an individual was born or where their parents live.
"an alien having a residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning, who is a bona fide student qualified to pursue a full course of study and who seeks to enter the United States temporarily and solely for the purpose of pursuing such a course of study" is a "nonimmigrant alien."
(33) The term "residence" means the place of general abode; the place of general abode of a person means his principal, actual dwelling place in fact, without regard to intent.
I certify that I seek to enter or remain in the United States temporarily, and solely for the purpose of pursuing a full program of study at the school named above.
-PJ
It needs to be read in combination with the 1952 Immigration Act statutes, marriage and birth certificates, and explanations of how the Immigration and Naturalization Service processed its cases, to understand the frequency and magnitude of the immigration fraud that the parents of Kamala Harris engaged in. (The extensive cover-up of that fraud, also serves as demonstrable "proof" that Kamala Harris was born as an illegal alien, not as a natural-born citizen).
A condensed and annotated version is available via http://www.kamalaharrisineligible.com
As the sole surviving witness who could testify to the intentions behind those acts, do not be surprised if something happens to Donald Harris prior to Election Day 2024 (as happened to Madelyn Dunham, on the final week prior to the Election of 2008).
Madelyn Dunham dying was just a coincidence. / bad joke
It required the father to be a natural born citizen.
Since we are not into sex discrimination in the modern USA, Obama with his natural born American mom was not judicially barred by it.
Harris’ parents were migrants. Mom left for Canada with her offspring and daddy went back to Jamaica.
You are quite correct. Old English citizenship laws - to which the founders based their NBC standards on - required BOTH parents to be NBC.
Unfortunately Mary trump was born in Scotland. So Donald Trump was and is ineligible to be president.
"At birth" means exactly the same thing as "subsequent to birth."
Naturalization "at birth" is a real thing. The 14th amendment does it, and the naturalization act of 1952 also does it.
Ignoring stuff you don't like is pretty easy for most people.
No they d@mn sure did not! There were no old English "citizenship" laws, only laws governing Subjects. English common law requires *SUBJECTS* to have perpetual allegiance to the crown.
That is absolutely the very first thing "We the People" tossed out when we declared independence in 1776.
US *CITIZEN* is not at all based on British *SUBJECT*. The only reason people thought it was was because of deliberate misdirection perpetrated by people like William Rawle, who knew better, but spread those false ideas anyway.
US *Citizen* is based on Swiss Citizen (the only place in the world that actually had "citizens"), as described by Vattel.
Unfortunately Mary trump was born in Scotland. So Donald Trump was and is ineligible to be president.
Look up "partus sequitur patrem".
*ONLY* the father mattered. Mothers didn't matter at all.
Comment on the lengthy pattern of FRAUD committed by the parents of Kamala Harris, relating to US immigration laws.
Consider: These discussions would be moot, if foreigners allowed to enter the US "solely" for study, obeyed the oath they swore and did not get married and have a child here!
Consider: The prospective head of enforcement of federal laws on January 20, 2025, would be a woman who herself committed sworn perjury on an official federal document, (as part of a cover-up, of her parent's immigration fraud).
This could be far more productive, than splitting hairs on interpretations of century-old legal rulings.
Y-you mean, all this time and she was unqualified to serve as Vice President, let alone Border Czar?!
Didn’t English common law require the father to be a citizen in order to pass citizenship to their descendants? I can’t address Chester Arthur situation. Perhaps the courts did the same thing then as they did 100 + years later - ignore it.
What does seem obvious is that we have a lot of people in power positions that may not have a natural affinity to the nation they deem their home. Bad enough we have the commo-fascist element destroying us from within.
My argument has been rendered pointless - to say the least.
I don’t see the fraud you are talking about. Can you give a few examples?
I remember back in 2020 there where accusations about immigration fraud but most of it turned out to be people misunderstanding what the documents said.
A foreigner swears their intent to enter the USA is "solely" for study, then marries and has a child in the USA, and later petitions to re-enter based on family unification (citing a daughter born in the USA). Is this not fraud?
Do you believe that the intention of authorization of Student Visas by the US in the 1952 Immigration Act was to encourage the birth of anchor babies who could run for President? Or, was the US birth of Kamala Harris a fraud upon the United States?
Have you read the (link) Kamala Harris Dossier? If so, do you recall the numerous lies by the parents of Kamala Harris, including the post-birth cover-up?
Have you considered the fact that Kamala Harris has two separate birth certificates, each including a differing middle name? How is that not evidence of fraud, particularly when the revision was applied for just 2 days after the end of a mandatory registration of an alien child would have occurred?
These are just a couple examples. Have a closer look.
Kamala Harris Got Away With It As VP – She Should Not Be Allowed to Get Away With It As The Commander In Chief – Trump Should Challenge Her Constitutional Eligibility: http://www.thepostemail.com/2024/07/22/kamala-harris-got-away-with-it-as-vp-she-should-not-be-allowed-to-get-away-with-it-as-the-commander-in-chief-trump-should-challenge-her-constitutional-eligibility/
For information about the Chester Arthur’s usurpation of office see this book: http://www.iuniverse.com/en/bookstore/bookdetails/775911-Imposters-in-the-Oval-Office
VP Kamala Harris - Jamaican Citizen at and by Birth: http://www.kerchner.com/images/protectourliberty/vp-harris-usurper-with-jamaican-flag-on-pole.jpg
Are you filing any lawsuits?
Was she still a student when she got married?
Was she still here on a student visa?
Does the 1958 form specifical prohibit marriage and getting pregnant while here on a student visa?
As near as I can tell the 1952 Act neither encouraged nor discourages student visa holders from getting married or having children.
“The first section of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution declares that ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and of the state wherein they reside. ‘ This language would seem to be sufficiently broad to cover the case of the petitioner. He is a person born in the United States. Any doubt on the subject, if there can be any, must arise out of the words ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ They alone are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States who are within their dominions and under the protection of their laws, and with the consequent obligation to obey them when obedience can be rendered; and only those thus subject by their birth or naturalization are within the terms of the amendment. The jurisdiction over those latter must, at the time, be both actual and exclusive. The words mentioned except from citizenship children born in the United States of persons engaged in the diplomatic service of foreign governments, such as ministers and ambassadors, whose residence, by a fiction of public law, is regarded as part of their own country.” In re Look Tin Sing, 21 F. 905 (9th Cir. 1884)
https://casetext.com/case/in-re-look-tin-sing
Yes, she was present in the US on a Student Visa until April 30, 1965, although that visa had lapsed in mid-October 1964 (just 5 days prior to the birth of Kamala Harris).
Yes, the 1958 Student Visa application form "solely" provided entrance for full-time study at an approved institution.
Yes, the 1952 Act does not mention marriage or children, however it limits activities "solely" for full-time study. The more pertinent language of the "F" Student Visa section starts with "an alien having a residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning..." before it even begins to describe the student himself, which is indicative of its intention of a limitation to the person granted entry to the US.
Continue reading, as you are starting to understand how we got to where we are in 2024, starting with what happened in 1958.
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.
