Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: ElIguana
with republicans like this, who needs democrats?

"...the party on the left is now the party on the right..."

3 posted on 04/09/2012 5:31:58 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (I think in about 5 - no, 4 - years I'll have had enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: the invisib1e hand
"with republicans like this, who needs democrats?"

You've got it ‘hand.’ Why should she put her foot in it when no Republican will admit her or she has ever heard of Chief Justice Morrison Waite, whose decision turned the law familiar to our framers into precedent. Minor v. Happersett, 88 US 162, (1875):

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

This is a stall until the dust has settled. If Marco Rubio winds up as vice president, it is likely that the Democrats will raise the issue, because Rubio was not born to citizen parents, and Barack's potential to command distruction will have been terminated. Barack Obama has never claimed to be a natural born citizen. Limiting the presidency to natural born citizens is a negative liberty from his perspective. Barack told us in 2002 that he regards the Constitution as principally of historical significance. Barack told us he is a naturalized citizen. That is probably true. His mother's citizenship makes him a citizen, with a few caveats; but his father's non-citizenship prevents him from ever being a native, or natural born citizen.

Don't be confused. A ‘native’ is the historical term for natural born citizen, as was confirmed in Minor v. Happersett quoted above. A ‘native-born citizen of the US’ is a 14th Amendment naturalized citizen. Anchor babies are 'native-born' citizens, and not eligible to be president. There are only two classes of citizen, naturalized - by Article 1 Section 8’s charter to congress to create an uniform rule of naturalization, and natural born, from millenia of acceptance, from natural law, and as cited, both as precedent and dictum at least thirty times in Supreme Court decisions.

Ask any legislator why Minor v. Happersett no longer holds. Ask any legislator why Chief Justice John Marshall's citation of Law of Nations definition, ‘born on the soil to citizen parents’ is not still the common law, or Chief Justice Waite's precedent in Minor has been overturned. They won't answer, or will pretend they don't know. They are all liars, afraid of the consequences from the truth.

23 posted on 04/09/2012 6:32:57 PM PDT by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson