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

Skip to comments.

NY Times 1859 Natural Born Citizen as Defined By The US Administration
NY Times Archives ^ | Summer 1859 | NY Times

Posted on 03/18/2011 8:38:52 PM PDT by patlin

1859 Official Opinion of US Admin

1859 Opinion of US Admin

1859 Opinion of US Attorney General

1859 Opinion of US Attorney General

(Excerpt) Read more at constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com ...


TOPICS: Education; Government; History; Reference
KEYWORDS: certifigate; constitution; immigration; march2011; naturalborncitizen; naturalization
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: patlin; All

This goes hand in hand with this exact writing! You have to read it!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2690317/posts


21 posted on 03/18/2011 9:52:27 PM PDT by jcsjcm (This country was built on exceptionalism and individualism. In God we Trust - Laus Deo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patlin
Obama has already admitted that he was British at birth and that alone disqualified him. We need to stick to the real constitutional issue instead of going off on a wild goose chase as Hinmann did going after Chester Arthur in 1880.

This Regime has never been constrained by truth. We don't know who those are who press to follow a path proved to have no facts when Obama himself has told us he is a 14th Amendment citizen, naturalized because citizens are either natural or naturalized, not a natural born Citizen. His cadre has an enormous advantage in their control of the the mainstream media. Explaining the historical and legal truth isn't easy, but you Patlin are showing discipline by keeping it simple. We don't know how many of those who keep redirecting the eligibility discussion to birth certificates are trolls.

A birth certificate, even one from Hawaii, does not change the nationality of Obama’s father, and retrospectively making Obama Sr. a U.S. citizen is the only way Barry is eligible. We need to keep explaining this fact until it is understood by all who do care about our Constitution. The rest will always place party politics a race above individual freedom, and above the Constitution.

22 posted on 03/18/2011 10:20:46 PM PDT by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: patlin

bump


23 posted on 03/18/2011 10:23:37 PM PDT by RightGeek (FUBO and the donkey you rode in on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding

This Regime has never been constrained by truth. We don’t know who those are who press to follow a path proved to have no facts when Obama himself has told us he is a 14th Amendment citizen, naturalized because citizens are either natural or naturalized, not a natural born Citizen. His cadre has an enormous advantage in their control of the the mainstream media. Explaining the historical and legal truth isn’t easy, but you Patlin are showing discipline by keeping it simple. We don’t know how many of those who keep redirecting the eligibility discussion to birth certificates are trolls.

A birth certificate, even one from Hawaii, does not change the nationality of Obama’s father, and retrospectively making Obama Sr. a U.S. citizen is the only way Barry is eligible. We need to keep explaining this fact until it is understood by all who do care about our Constitution. The rest will always place party politics a race above individual freedom, and above the Constitution.


However there are real world court decisions on the other side of the issue that must be contended with.
“Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States natural-born citizens.”
Indiana Court of Appeals, Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels November 12, 2009.
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

Quoted in the 1898 US Supreme Court’s US v Wong Kim Ark decision, “Justice Joseph Story once declared in Inglis v. Trustees of Sailors Snug Harbor, 28 U.S. (3 Pet.) 99 (1830), that “Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children, even of aliens, born in a country, while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government, and owing a temporary allegiance thereto, are subjects by birth.” Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. at 660, 18 S. Ct. at 461 (quoting Inglis, 28 U.S. (3 Pet.) at 164 (Story, J., concurring)). The Court also cited Justice Curtis’s dissent in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1856):


24 posted on 03/18/2011 10:45:11 PM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: patlin

I still don’t see why being born C-Section should disqualify someone from being president.


25 posted on 03/18/2011 10:47:52 PM PDT by wolfman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding; patlin; Red Steel; rxsid
State of Europe.. America: laying the foundation of a great empire Photobucket
26 posted on 03/18/2011 10:48:49 PM PDT by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding
but you Patlin are showing discipline by keeping it simple

“KISS” is my motto. It's also just plain common sense as stated by Justice Story in his Rules for Constitutional Interpretation. I found his works in early 2009 & have lived by them since when researching the history & interpretation of the 14th which “DOES” give us the meaning of Article II natural born. Donofrio & Mario disagree with me, but then they have been bogged down by their lawyer degrees. As Justice Story said in that commentary:

§ 210. XV. In the first place, then, every word employed in the constitution is to be expounded in its plain, obvious, and common sense, unless the context furnishes some ground to control, qualify, or enlarge it. Constitutions are not designed for metaphysical or logical subtleties, for niceties of expression, for critical propriety, for elaborate shades of meaning, or for the exercise of philosophical acuteness, or juridical research. They are instruments of a practical nature, founded on the common business of human life, adapted to common wants, designed for common use, and fitted for common understandings. The people make them; the people adopt them; the people must be supposed to read them, with the help of common sense; and cannot be presumed to admit in them any recondite meaning, or any extraordinary gloss.

27 posted on 03/18/2011 10:52:29 PM PDT by patlin (Ignorance is Bliss for those who choose to wear rose colored glasses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: patlin

We done been “deluded and snared”!


28 posted on 03/18/2011 10:55:04 PM PDT by HardStarboard (I'm sure George and Dick had quiet smiles while watching the election results!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
jameseeeee, you are SOOOOO out of you league, but if you insist on posting then it shall be our duty to keep laughing at you.
29 posted on 03/18/2011 11:02:47 PM PDT by patlin (Ignorance is Bliss for those who choose to wear rose colored glasses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: patlin

We could use a few “new” Justices Story these days. Brilliant clarity of mind!!


30 posted on 03/18/2011 11:03:12 PM PDT by HardStarboard (I'm sure George and Dick had quiet smiles while watching the election results!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

ping


31 posted on 03/19/2011 1:42:01 AM PDT by plsjr (<>< ... http://NewSpring.cc/webservice - check it out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patlin

Terrific research. Thank you.

I haven’t been following this very much so please forgive my naivety... I was born in Europe and my husband was born here as was our daughter. Is she eligible to be president?


32 posted on 03/19/2011 2:43:02 AM PDT by bronxville (if science disagrees with the Bible, it means that science hasn't caught up w/ all the facts yet..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: patlin

I liked this post so much..it is the reason I am sipping my second bottle of wine..

The first was a Alexis Lichine Merlot 2008..the second an Abruzzo something..both very cheap..

I sit here..how in the heck was he elected..the only conclusion is ignorance..

Ignorance opens the dark door to tyranny.


33 posted on 03/19/2011 2:46:00 AM PDT by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

1) He was British by his birth - from his Father’s citizenship.
2) He was Indonesian by adoption - from his Mother’s subsequent Husband.
3) While an adult (in college, grad school) he identified himself as a foreign student (implied by limited information known about this time of his life).
4) While an adult, he traveled under a non-US passport to a country (Pakistan) which banned US travelers at that time. (surmised, not proven)

Given these disqualifying issues, it is irrelevant where (Hawaii, Washington State, Canada, Kenya) he was born. Mr. Barry Sotero is not a Natural Born Citizen.


34 posted on 03/19/2011 3:46:35 AM PDT by mason-dixon (As Mason said to Dixon, you have to draw the line somewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mason-dixon

1) He was British by his birth - from his Father’s citizenship.
2) He was Indonesian by adoption - from his Mother’s subsequent Husband.
3) While an adult (in college, grad school) he identified himself as a foreign student (implied by limited information known about this time of his life).
4) While an adult, he traveled under a non-US passport to a country (Pakistan) which banned US travelers at that time. (surmised, not proven)

Given these disqualifying issues, it is irrelevant where (Hawaii, Washington State, Canada, Kenya) he was born. Mr. Barry Sotero is not a Natural Born Citizen.

________________________________________________________________________

Outstanding!

++++!!!!

The BC/COLB/Place of birth are not relevant. When Rudy Giliani says “he was born in the country”. The response needs to be - so what, what about jus sanguini.

The next round of billboards just need to say this:

“jus sanguini

Translantion: Born a Brit, ain’t legit.”


35 posted on 03/19/2011 6:02:13 AM PDT by bluecat6 ( "A non-denial denial. They doubt our heritage, but they don't say the story is not accurate.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: bronxville
I was born in Europe and my husband was born here as was our daughter. Is she eligible to be president?

If you were naturalized before your daughter's birth, the answer is yes.

A NBC is a person born on US soil of TWO citizen parentS.

0b0z0 didn't meet this condition by his own admission that his father, the roaming Communist vagabond BO Sr., was a Kenyan/British citizen! Assuming that that was his REAL father.

36 posted on 03/19/2011 6:56:14 AM PDT by melancholy (Papa Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: patlin

The Kenyan never was, is, nor ever will be eligible to hold the office of the POTUS. The other two branches are spitting on the Constitution, our founding fathers, and every US citizen.


37 posted on 03/19/2011 6:58:25 AM PDT by bgill (Kenyan Parliament - how could a man born in Kenya who is not even a native American become the POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1
the second an Abruzzo something..both very cheap..

Correction:

the second an Abruzzo 0b0z0 something..both very cheap.. no known origin.

38 posted on 03/19/2011 7:02:12 AM PDT by melancholy (Papa Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: bronxville
I haven’t been following this very much so please forgive my naivety... I was born in Europe and my husband was born here as was our daughter. Is she eligible to be president?

Was she born on US soil & were you a naturalized US citizen when she was born? If the answer to both is “yes’, then yes she is eligible.

Now, had the feminist movement and progressivism not messed with the tried & TRUE from time immemorial natural law doctrine of the family unit that our founding fathers adopted, where in the wife & all children born into that marriage follow the nationality of the father, the world would be a better place and people wouldn't be paying for all these legal against the US Govt from legal & illegal aliens. This issue costs us taxpayers over a 100 billion dollars a year. A cost we need to cut immediately & get back to enforcing our founding principles of citizenship by consent.

39 posted on 03/19/2011 7:22:31 AM PDT by patlin (Ignorance is Bliss for those who choose to wear rose colored glasses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1
I liked this post so much..it is the reason I am sipping my second bottle of wine...The first was a Alexis Lichine Merlot 2008..the second an Abruzzo something..both very cheap..

OMG, that was at 4 in the morning, I would have been under the table hours ago!

40 posted on 03/19/2011 7:25:49 AM PDT by patlin (Ignorance is Bliss for those who choose to wear rose colored glasses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

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.

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