Skip to comments.JUDGE ORDERS OBAMA to APPEAR to Testify
Posted on 01/20/2012 10:57:39 AM PST by GregNH
click here to read article
Finally decided to stick your head out of the ground, resident Orly hater?
Sorry, but you ARE arguing with YOURSELF. I showed you where Gray noted specifically that Minor was found to be a citizen because she was born to citizens of the case, and you said:
The excerpt is stating what the facts were for Minor.
How can the Wong Kim Ark be stating a "fact" that you said was only "implied"??? It leads back to the same question. Why does Gray emphasize that Minor was born to citizen parents?? He's not going to waste his time on something that's not relevant to the holding of the case, so let's drop the stupid excuses and deflections. Focus, chick, focus.
And you are repeatedly wrong, because there was a dispute as to HOW she became a citizen. Read and learn. You seem to have missed huge sections of the decision, starting in the SECOND PARAGAPH:
The argument is, that as a woman, born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, is a citizen of the United States and of the State in which she resides, she has the right of suffrage as one of the privileges and immunities of her citizenship, which the State cannot by its laws or constitution abridge.
The bolded part is the citizen clause from the 14th amendment. The Minor court DISPUTED this argument.
There is no doubt that women may be citizens. They are persons, and by the fourteenth amendment "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" are expressly declared to be "citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But, in our opinion, it did not need this amendment to give them that position. Before its adoption the Constitution of the United States did not in terms prescribe who should be citizens of the United States or of the several States, yet there were necessarily such citizens without such provision.
The court went on to explain different ways of becoming a citizen, which is when it volunteered the definition of natural-born citizenship, which was sufficient for rejecting Minor's 14th amendment citizenship argument. And to make sure this is CLEAR to you:
The fourteenth amendment did not affect the citizenship of women any more than it did of men. In this particular, therefore, the rights of Mrs. Minor do not depend upon the amendment. She has always been a citizen from her birth, and entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizenship. The amendment prohibited the State, of which she is a citizen, from abridging any of her privileges and immunities as a citizen of the United States; but it did not confer citizenship on her.
Read that last sentence and let it sink in. Minor's argument of being a citizen via the 14th amendment was rejected. Because she was an NBC, the 14th amendment did NOT confer citizenship on her. The Wong Kim Ark decision affirms the principle by noting that:
In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in question, said: "The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens.""
Gray says that by following Minor, the 14th amendment does NOT say who shall be natural-born citizens. Then he explains this same principle in another fashion, by saying through the unanimous decision in Minor, that the Supreme Court was:
committed to the view that all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment
Now, keeping all this in mind, it should start being very obvious why Gray EMPHASIZED that Minor was born to citizen parents, even though it was never stated directly in Minor.
This isn't entirely true. Gray relied on the Law of Nations to take issue with part of the Slaughterhouse ruling where it combined consuls and foreign ministers as falling under exceptions to the subject clause of the 14th amendment. The Law of Nations is troublesome for Gray in reaching his final conclusion, but he certainly had no trouble using it when it was convenient to his point:
This was wholly aside from the question in judgment and from the course of reasoning bearing upon that question. It was unsupported by any argument, or by any reference to authorities, and that it was not formulated with the same care and exactness as if the case before the court had called for an exact definition of the phrase is apparent from its classing foreign ministers and consuls together -- whereas it was then well settled law, as has since been recognized in a judgment of this court in which Mr. Justice Miller concurred, that consuls, as such, and unless expressly invested with a diplomatic character in addition to their ordinary powers, are not considered as entrusted with authority to represent their sovereign in his intercourse [p679] with foreign States or to vindicate his prerogatives, or entitled by the law of nations to the privileges and immunities of ambassadors or public ministers, but are subject to the jurisdiction, civil and criminal, of the courts of the country in which they reside.
Absolutely. And it should have happened in 2008. There are serious flaws in how candidate eligibility is handled on the federal level. I am optimistic that when BHO is out of office and the knee jerk emotions are removed from the equation, proper structures will be implemented.
That said, I just cannot see this latest hearing working out in the Birther’s favor. Each time they get what they think they want(COLB, Newspaper announcements, LFBC, etc.) they just move the goalposts or insist that the evidence is forged. BHO’s lawyers could waltz on in with the same COLB that was scanned back in 2008 and that will be that. Screams of “Forgery!” or “Look at this court case from the 1800’s that said women can't vote!” only make the Birthers look kooky to the general public who doesn't get emotionally enmeshed in these things.
Just to add, I mean a general ‘they’. I do not mean each and every Birther.
“You must agree that progress has been made and the trend is not in Obamas favor.”
I am not so sure about that. It seems to me that the net effect would be how many folks would not vote vote BHO who otherwise would have. And with a contrasting look at how many people would have voted for a GOP candidate that didn't because of perceived ties to Birther ideology. (I wanted to write ‘Conservative, but it doesn't look like that's gonna happen...)
Well, on Friday it will be more clear as to what will transpire.
I honestly have no desire to go there. I am sure they have their own level of idiocy and I really don’t want to see it.
I do things other than browse FR.
I don't have a photobucket account and was wondering if you or someone who might could determine the upload date? The origins of that pic would be useful info.
Actually now that I look at more pictures up there it appears it could be your account...my bad.
I do things other than browse FR.
But you are always Johnny on the Spot when there is a ruling against Orly...
I can try. It looks like a photo of Barack. Assuming it is, it would presumably be from the period in which he was a Senator. He looks many years younger than currently, and of course there is the Wedding ring which sets a lower limit on the time period.
The Shirt Sleeves indicate warm weather, either a warm clime or summer. The crappy boat indicates a third world country. On the face of it, my guess is that this is Senator Barack Visiting Kenya.
With a bit more effort, we could probably figure out the body of water involved, and use satellite view to possibly find the area likely where is that boat. (if it's still floating. :) )
“Sometimes, you keep evidence to yourself and wait to pounce.
Someone did that with the BC that he faked. Obama used it.”
Are you implying that one of the BCs was faked by someone hoping to trap Obama? I presume you mean the 2008 Certification of Live Birth? Could knowledge of the fake have been used for blackmail? It certainly wasn’t effective in derailing his 2008 campaign....
Very interesting idea!
Which Laws Could Have Been Broken?
MISUSE OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTY, CONSPIRACY, MISPRISION OF FELONY?
I've never bothered to look at the lower court, so I wasn't aware of this. If everything is indeed as you have described, then Wong Kim Ark is unjustifiable, and simply wrong from beginning to end.
On the other hand, I consider it quite possible that both the lower court and the Gray court were simply sloppy, and did not appreciate the distinction between the different classes of citizens.
In any case, holding that people born here of foreign parents are "natural born citizens" is clearly contrary to the intent of the 14th amendment. The words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" were inserted specifically to prevent citizenship from passing to transient aliens, as is made far clearer in the Civil rights act of 1866 which was created by the Authors of the 14th amendment.
I personally think that Justice Gray and the other court was more interested in Rebuking what they perceived as "racism" than they were about accurately administering the law. Failing to mention the War of 1812, ( a singular rejection of the English Common law regarding citizenship) only makes sense if it were intentional.
In any case, it appears that you are right, and I was wrong.
Pray for him. With God's help, this will cause a tidal wave to sweep Obama out. If other states follow suit and the suit filed in Federal court is successful, Obama will be OFF the ballot as ineligible--in all 50 states. Hopefully the presiding judges in these suits won't be bought off or get scared, and we will get a ruling in the Constitution's favor, for a CHANGE.
We have to make this very, very clear: it is OBAMA'S FATHER'S CITIZENSHIP which he (Obama) has well-documented as KENYAN which is what disqualifies HIM from the "natural-born" citizen status. Unless he is willing to say his birth certificate is a fake or his Kenyan father is in fact, NOT his father, and he somehow dreams up an American father and new birth certificate, Obama has no where else to go on this.
Please feel free to copy and paste this simple explanation at your discretion.
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.