Skip to comments.Kerchner v Obama & Congress Appeal - Activity in the Case
Posted on 04/06/2010 9:37:40 PM PDT by rxsid
"Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Kerchner v Obama & Congress Appeal - Activity in the Case
There has been activity in the Kerchner et al vs. Obama & Congress et al Appeal before the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia Pa.
1st: Atty Apuzzo has sent a letter on 2 Apr 2010 to the Court of Appeals requesting addition to the record of the dissertation on natural born Citizenship written by David Ramsay and published in 1789, one of the founders of our nation.
2nd: A letter dated 6 April 2010 was received today from the Court of Appeals scheduling a hearing date for the case on Tuesday, June 29, 2010 in Newark NJ. The court indicated in the letter that it has not yet decided whether it will permit Oral Arguments and that the parties to the case will be notified on that decision at a later time. If Oral Arguments are not permitted the case will be decided on the written Briefs and documents before the court. The appeal will be heard by a panel of three Federal 3rd Circuit Judges the names of whom have not been provided at this time.
Atty Mario Apuzzo will provide a fuller explanation about the filing he made and letter received today from the court later this evening or tomorrow.
Commander USNR (Retired)
Kerchner v Obama & Congress
When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdoms dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.s children.http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html
It can't. Of course not. Yet, right there, on his campaign web site F.T.S., it's stated that a foreign government "governed" Barry from birth and the reason it did, was that Barry inherited that foreign citizenship by way of his foreign national father (no matter where he was born). Assuming, of course, that Sr. was his legal father at birth.
How, then, could he possibly be a "Natural Born Citizen" of the U.S.?
Barry Soetoro, the divided citizen at birth!
Furthermore: Hawaii's Territorial Law, Chapter 57 - "VITAL STATISTICS, I", shown beginning pg 23 of 29, (the law in effect in 1961) allowed baby's born anywhere in the world to be eligible to apply for a Hawaiian birth certificate based on the word of 1 relative.
"Kerchner v Obama & Congress Appeal - Activity in the Case "
will read later .. kinda late in the East Coast. Thanks for posting.
Good to see Apuzzo has added the David Ramsey dissertation to the case against Obama.
It’s already been sent to him.
Apuzzo also included The American Law Review article by George Collins “Are Persons Born Within the United States Ispo Facto Citizens Thereof?”
Wonder if he has the video of Michelle saying Kenya is Barack’s homeland?
I don't know how he could miss it.
Mario Apuzzo is a real patriot along with Mr. Kerchner. Mario just keeps patiently plugging away.
I have felt that his case from the beginning has always been a real sleeper.
So if he loses in the Court of Appeals in Newark - what is the next step? SCOTUS?
I beleive that's correct, yes. It will wind up there even if they win, though. Whether or not SCOTUS would hear it, is another thing. If they win, I would think SCOTUS would almost certainly hear it. If they (Kerchner) loose, not so sure.
Thanks for the ping. Watching and praying for Mr. Apuzzo and this case.
There was supposedly something unique about Mario’s case that was a bit different. I forget what it was.
~ ~ ~
Note for tomorrow
Atty Apuzzo & CDR Kerchner on Revolution Radio Show hosted by Dr. Kate -
Wed, 07 Apr 2010, 9:10 p.m. EST
Atty Mario Apuzzo and CDR Kerchner will be guests on Revolution Radio Show hosted by Dr. Kate on Wednesday, 7 April 2010, at 9:10 p.m. EST.
Direct link to Revolution Radio show at BlogTalkRadio.com:
Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Commander USNR (Retired), Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner v Obama & Congress
Please if you can, see this site and help the cause: http://www.protectourliberty.org
8:10AM our time. *sigh* Maybe.
Perhaps it was that they included Congress, the Senate, the House, Cheney and Pelosi as (co) defendants.
Kerchner saw problems well ahead of the election and created grounds for his suit. He didn't need to use unavailable birth certificates or school records or passports. Those had been, or were in the process of being concealed, in one case by the employee of Obama’s campaign security adviser and former CIA special ops director John Brennen (that employee ended up with a bullet in his head).
Apuzzo, Kerchner's attorney, would not bother if he did not still have trust in our legal system to respect the Constitution. Read his case. He mentions all the hidden documents because they could become relevant, and must appear in the pleading or cannot be addressed later.
Appuzo along with Leo Donofrio (something about Italians and our Constitution?) have done more to educate modern America about our framers and founders than anyone in my half century of life. Who would have even known that we had presidents of Congress United, such as Dr. Ramsay, who wrote at least a dozen volumes on the history of our nation and of his state, South Carolina? Ramsay is just another of our framers who happened to write an essay on citizenship and confirmed what every framer knew, that a natural born citizen was "born in the country of citizen parents." Whether it is true that Apuzzo was appraised of the Ramsay essay by the fine historians at U. of Connecticut who would rather not take credit in this Alinsky-tainted political environment, they offered the graceful historical insight into the history of natural born citizenship at http://undeadrevolution.wordpress.com/.
Reading the Apuzzo case is not easy, but his essays are excellent. Apuzzo and Donofrio, hardly famous attorneys, are showing the greatness of America. They are showing too that impressive titles have nothing to do with taking on one of the most difficult and important cases in judicial history - a real world application of original intent. Madison warned that without interpretation based upon the language of our framers the Constitution would become meaningless.
Obama is betting that the Constitution is an artifact, and means whatever the politicians in power want it to mean. He was aided by a couple of potential appointees to the court, Larry Tribe of Harvard, Obama’s constitutional law professor, and Ted Olson, who helped by vouching for John McCain's eligibility; McCain, should he somehow have prevailed in the election was absolutely changeable, and had been challenged before. But twenty four efforts to amend Article II Section 1 “natural born citizenship” had failed, so a plot was clearly hatched by Democrats to make McCain their adversary. (My guess is that had McCain won he would have been challenged and would lose; the next highest vote count would have been to Obama or Hillary, and Republicans would then have shown their non-citizen father card, making Hillary president.)
For some lawyers the law is about finding a prior judgment to win the case for your client. For a few, respecting and defending the Constitution is still important. The guys with tenured positions and big reputations apparently feel they have more to lose by defending truth and the Constitution. Thank goodness we have outstanding lawyers like Apuzzo and Donofrio who recognize that losing our Constitution means losing our freedom. The barristers didn't do badly working for the King, but our country won't belong to us or to Prince Obama because our Constitution and the freedoms for the individual it protects are the framework which permitted citizens to make us wealthy, and the disappearance of which will put us, as Hayek explained, on "The Road to Serfdom."
Godspeed to them both.
And yes, godspeed to the two of them and the other plaintiff's on the case.
This is the smokeing gun we have been looking for. A founding father, Ramsey, docmenting NBC, that NBC is inhereted citizenship by Two parents of that same citizenship. Obama is not qualified as per a founding Father:
[c]itizenship is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens . Id. at 6. He added that citizenship by inheritance belongs to none but the children of those Americans, who, having survived the declaration of independence, acquired that adventitious character in their own right, and transmitted it to their offspring . Id. at 7. He continued that citizenship as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776 . Id. at 6.
Obama was served the suit before he was sworn into office.
It seems Ramsey is the missing link to the definition of NBC. This is an incredible find. My hat is off to the person who found it.
This single statement (among others) written by a founder shortly after the constitution was created eliminates anyone from the presidency who is not born to a father who is a US citizen:
[c]itizenship is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens .
If Obama is not removed, at least in future elections he will be disqualified. There is no way he can run again with this on the table. The door to re-election will be shut. shut.
It appears the “Chicago Kid” with the “home country” of Kenya is an illigitimate President.
This has been getting worse with each passing week.
They have educated Americans on The Constitution. I have always thought Mario's case was the quiet sleeper stealth case from the day it was filed.
Did Mario serve Obama before he took office? I wonder what the implications are? I think his case is the sleeper.
I wonder if the U Conn law school students who I think have been helping Leo found it. Leo’s sister is also an attorney but I am not sure if she found it. It is incredible.
The hurdle of public opinion may trump law as far as removing Obama. I don't know if the public has the stomach or a Judge with the guts to force a constitutional crisis.
Disqualifying him in each state from running for Reelection may be the only remedy going forward. But knowing Obama, he will unleash riots with the race card.
But looking forward, we may well see health care collapse in 2012 when his plan starts to ripple through the insurance markets. At that point, when Insurance premiums double and doctors are not taking patients, kicking him out might be a very popular proposition.
Franzie, it is a big relief that Ramsay put this to print.
At the very least, going forward, this puts to rest the claim that an Anchor baby can become president.
That’s right. However, to prevent any kind of precedent being set, this needs to be addressed prior to completion of a full term.
That's incorrect. Kerchner's suit was filed on Inauguration Day, January 20, and was not served on anyone until February 17, 2009.
But Kerchner's case is not at all unique in that respect either, which is what Frantzie inquired about. Berg v. Obama, Keyes v. Bowen, Lightfoot v. Bowen, Donofrio v. Wells, Hollister v. Soetoro, Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz, and others were all filed before Obama was sworn in.
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.