Georgia Obama Ballot Challenge Update: Petition for Writ of Certiorari Filed With (SCOTUS)

I agree with everything you’ve said in your excellent post, but one line in particular stands out-

“Now, we are in a shambles, facing drought and God only knows what else.”

I believe I know what we are facing.

That is the Devil and his Horde, and I do mean that literally. I have learned what communism is. It is relentless Evil. It never stops planning, disguising, entrenching, organizing and executing.

While we sleep, it marches endlessly against us.

I believe that the only people who are not engaged in The March of Hell are those who believe in Jesus Christ, and I mean genuinely believe in Him, not just go to church on Sunday and live otherwise Monday-Saturday.

If a person believes that he/ she must account for the contents of their life upon death, then that person’s conscience will not allow them to march in such a fashion.

I believe we have reached the point where only Jesus Christ can save us, and I mean that literally as well.

That's delusional. The current state of the law is that a person born in the US is Natural Born for purposes of Article II Section 1--you may not like it but that is the current legal rule under the U S Constitution.

Oh, the Indiana state Ankeny opinion elevated over the Supreme Court, yes I got it. The current state of law have forsaken original intent. That's not delusional that's a fact. They just make it up as they go or go quack some other erroneous ruling, but that floats both political parties boat so who cares.

The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch)

Inglis v. Sailors’ Snug Harbor, (1830)

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. (1830)

Dred Scott v. Sandford, (1857)

Slaughter-House Cases, (1872)

Minor v. Happersett, (1875)

Elk v. Wilkins, (1884)

United States v. Ward (1890)

Perkins v. Elg, (1939)

Schneider v. Rusk, (1964)

The Supreme Court opinions above whether they are holdings, dicta, or conclusions, taken in totality, make a pretty powerful case, but we know the contemporary courts are blind and mute to them.

Judges today rather act in specious ways promoting administrative and lower court cases to protect Obama, and that's not much difference the way John Roberts did with ObamaCare. It sure floated Roberts' boat.

And, why should citizenship of the parents make a difference? From our point of view, Rubio would make a great President committed to American Constitutional principles of government

American Constitutional principles of government? The man who is obsessed with making illegal aliens legal. The man who is obsessed in pushing his Dream Act. Back in the day, they would have called this a foreign evasion. His "principles" are foreign and counter to the natural born citizen clause's original purpose preventing foreign allegiances.

The reason why place of birth is important is because the government and the head of state of the place a person is born has the power under international law to assert certain kinds of control over the person throughout the course of their life.

When a person is born in a foreign country but has foreign parents does that make him a Natural Born citizen of the country that he was born in, or is he a Natural Born citizen of his parents home country? So you can be a Natural Born citizen of two or more countries at once? It must only be an American thang to have it both and many ways so forget natural law.

The Supreme Court has said people having duel citizenship have an obligation and rights of nationality to both countries. See Kawakita v. US, 1952:

"The concept of dual citizenship recognizes that a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both."

Would Kawakita under the language and intent of the Constitution's Natural Born citizen clause make him eligible for president? So what is the purpose of the NBC clause to the courts? Does the clause have any meaning to you or to these contemporary courts?

A good example is US tax policy. A German national; successful businessman who has earned billions of dollars of income throughout his life; born in the US in 1946 because his father was a prominent anti-Nazi businessman who was significant in connection with post war reconstruction efforts--the father and mother in New York for several weeks in connection with post war financing plans when the birth occurred; the US Government position is that he was liable for US Federal Income Tax on all of his billions of dollars of income throughout his life.

I see courts follow the billions $$. The guy is liable to both countries Germany and US which bring up the next point.

A better example. I have a neighbor who said that his son who is an American citizen, and has American parents, but was born in Germany. The son was called by Germany to duty to do compulsory German military service while he resided in the United States. And I've pointed out in Kawakita v. US 1952, he has a responsibility to Germany. So does that make him a Natural Born citizen of Germany or of the United States? The intent and meaning behind the NBC clause is to prevent to prevent split allegiances for US presidents, but today however, that has been relegated without amendment to the dustbin of history.

Making this argument a centerpiece of our legal effort has hurt our case badly.

I don't make it the centerpiece of the legal argument in current climate of the US judiciary since they go with the winds of political expediency. However, that does not mean I won't point out this obvious folly. I'm not going to remain silent about it. I agree with you that getting Obama on fraud and being born elsewhere leaves little else for the courts to hide behind while they currently protect him.

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.