[edge919]

james cites the Ankeny decision, which is full of contradictions. On one hand they mischaracterize the plaintiff's case about the relevance of where Obama was or wasn't born. In the introduction, the court says, "Specifically, Plaintiffs appear to argue that the Governor did not comply with this duty because:" ... "(b)neither President Barack Obama nor Senator John McCain were eligible to hold the office of President because neither were “born naturally within any Article IV State of the 50 United States of America․”' In Part B, they say, "the most common argument has been waged by members of the so-called “birther” movement who suggest that the President was not born in the United States;" ..."The Plaintiffs in the instant case make a different legal argument based strictly on constitutional interpretation."

Then the court says: "Based upon 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” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents." But they contradict this guidance by footnoting: "We note the fact that the Court in Wong Kim Ark did not actually pronounce the plaintiff a “natural born Citizen” using the Constitution's Article II language ..."

[devattel]

edge919 said:

james cites the Ankeny decision, which is full of contradictions.

Thank you edge919. The decision is a proverbial train wreck. However, it is the typical response we have been seeing from the courts and their attempts to derail the issue can only be resolved at the Supreme Court level when dealing with the court system. After all, the Supreme Court is the ultimate Constitutional arbiter at the federal government level.

Once that decision is made, We the People would then have the ability to decide for ourselves. After all, we are the ultimate arbiters. What we say goes, and there is nothing anyone can do to take this right away from us. If we say de Vattel is the correct interpretation, it is the correct interpretation. Most of this nation is fixated on whether or not Obama was born in the U.S. They are not asking why it is relevant as the most important qualification for the position. Ask the question. You will most likely receive a blank stare and a poor response.

Until this nations starts asking why laws were written, they will be caught in a trap of "confusing, outdated technicalities".