Posted on 09/02/2008 1:36:23 AM PDT by Kevmo
Lawsuit over McCain citizenship should be tossed, GOP lawyers say
By Josh Richman Oakland Tribune
Article Launched: 08/28/2008 06:19:23 PM PDT
Lawyers for John McCain and the state and national Republican Party on Thursday asked a federal judge in San Francisco to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the candidate's place on California's Nov. 4 ballot.
Markham Robinson of Vacaville, chairman-elect of California's American Independent Party, sued McCain, the GOP and California Secretary of State Debra Bowen on Aug. 11, arguing the presidential candidate's birth 72 years ago today in the Panama Canal Zone means he's not a "natural-born citizen" — a Constitutional requirement to be president.
But lawyers for the GOP and McCain wrote Thursday that Robinson lacks standing to sue and is asking the courts to tread where the Constitution forbids.
Robinson hasn't shown McCain's candidacy causes him any harm, they said: He's neither a presidential candidate himself nor authorized to sue on behalf of his party or party nominee Alan Keyes, and stripping McCain from the ballot won't much improve the party's or Keyes' chances of winning.
If McCain were tossed, the GOP presumably would put up someone else in his place, they wrote. And even without a Republican in the race, they added, "Ambassador Keyes still would have to defeat Senator Obama in the state's general election."
Keyes ran against Obama for a U.S. Senate seat in Illinois in 2004 after Republicans drafted Keyes as a last-minute replacement for their initial nominee, Jack Ryan, who withdrew amid a sex scandal. Obama won the election with 70 percent of the vote to Keyes' 27 percent.
If that race is any guide, the GOP's lawyers dryly noted Thursday, Keyes' probability of beating Obama for president in California "seems, at best, speculative."
Anyhow, they argued, the Constitution says issues of presidential eligibility are to be decided by voters and the Electoral College and not the courts — a matter of separation of powers among the government's branches. And federal courts lack jurisdiction and cause to direct Bowen to exceed her statutory powers by questioning a party nominee's eligibility.
Robinson must file an opposing brief by Sept. 4, and U.S. District Judge William Alsup will consider the case Sept. 11.
The lawyers' brief doesn't discuss McCain's citizenship status. Federal law says anyone born in the Panama Canal Zone after Feb. 26, 1904, as a child of U.S. citizens is declared to be a U.S. citizen himself or herself. Some have questioned, however, whether this makes McCain a "natural-born citizen," a term the Constitution doesn't define any further; the federal law took effect about one year after McCain's birth, and doesn't say the person's citizenship was considered to have been acquired at birth.
McCain supporters have pointed to a 1790 law that provided that children of U.S. citizens born abroad "shall be considered as natural born citizens." Though no longer in effect, that law indicates what the founding fathers were thinking when the Constitution was drafted, those supporters contend.
The American Independents, a conservative party recently plagued by factional infighting, had 331,619 members as of May 19, comprising just over 2 percent of the state's registered voters. But there's anecdotal evidence that some voters join the party by mistake, believing they're registering as nonpartisan or "decline-to-state" voters.
Reach Josh Richman at 510-208-6428 or jrichman@bayareanewsgroup.com.
I had heard that a similar lawsuit against McCain had been dismissed. One would think that the lawyers for McCain would have a field day over the evidence for the birth certificate forgery in Obama's camp.
Here is the key paragraph, perhaps holding the McCain team back a little bit: Anyhow, they argued, the Constitution says issues of presidential eligibility are to be decided by voters and the Electoral College and not the courts — a matter of separation of powers among the government's branches. And federal courts lack jurisdiction and cause to direct Bowen to exceed her statutory powers by questioning a party nominee's eligibility.
What a joke of a competition for POTUS when even questions about where both McCain and Obama are born and presidential eligibility because of this are in question! McCain should truly be all over Obama over Obama’s fake birth certificate!
That’s why I wonder why the McCain camp isn’t all over this. They could get a lot of mileage from it.
“Hey, we released our paper copy of John’s BC, where’s Obama’s?”
Another Certifigate thread for your ping lists
Slightly off topic, but very funny. Are these the same voters who couldn't figure out which hole to punch in the 2000 Florida ballot?
Alan Keyes truly isn’t Presidential material, not after losing elections to a variety of political offices nine times in a row! Alan is a decent speaker and a decent writer, but he would truly be lousy as POTUS, IMHO. Alan Keyes and Newt Gingrich are somewhat in the same boat where they are terrific in both writing and speaking, but they are truly lousy in executive positions. Alan Keyes also truly has the additional weakness of being nutty, and I truly hope that Newt Gingrich doesn’t follow suit.
This is in California, not Florida. The voters in Kahleeforneeya are much smarter, they’re just nuts, that’s all.
We should honor his requests for pity posthaste, and make him as comfortable as possible - quickly now, someone fetch him some lemonade, a cucumber sandwich, and a maiden with a fan to keep the flies off his face...
My take on this is that the High Court of Fruits and Nuts (Kalifornia) is laying the groundwork for Obama's case to also be thrown out. I would like to know where in the Constitution it states that presidential eligibility is a matter for the voters to decide.
Also, since when are the voters and EC a branch of government whose powers need to be separated? There are four branches of government now?
It IS the Court's powers to interpret the Constitution, and they are claiming it's not. It is certainly within their powers to decide a Constitutional question...they do it every day of every week. If Obama gets the popular vote, then he must be eligible. If McCain doesn't get the popular vote, then he must not be eligible. What a crock.
My take on this is that the High Court of Fruits and Nuts (Kalifornia) is laying the groundwork for Obama’s case to also be thrown out. I would like to know where in the Constitution it states that presidential eligibility is a matter for the voters to decide.
***Actually, from what I read of the article, it is McCain’s Lawyers who are arguing that it’s the Electoral College who decides. Bad move.
>>>they argued, the Constitution says issues of presidential eligibility are to be decided by voters and the Electoral College and not the courts — a matter of separation of powers among the government’s branches.
Is there any truth to this statement or was this just written for this argument?
Because, if this is true, than isn’t the department of health and vital statistics obligated to release Obama’s birth certificate in that FOIA that that blogger submitted?
Also, I had contacted the Department of Homeland Security a few weeks ago to see if we could register our republican organization for the eVerify program. Then an eligibility check could be run on people seeking public office and wanting our backing. I was told by DHS that politicians don’t work for the citizens, they worked for the government.
Any thoughts?
Take a peak at my post 13. Any thoughts?
bump
I was told by DHS that politicians don’t work for the citizens, they worked for the government.
***I would expect DHS to backtrack on that statement, whoever told it to you would withdraw it in a heartbeat if their boss, their boss’s boss, and some reporters were present. That’s the weakpoint, so I would strike there.
In fairness to the phone conversation I had, my question seemed to have been given a little bit of weight. I went up to 3 people and ended up on a conference call with multiple people before that response was settled on.
Our voting on a person was not deemed a hiring process since the employment process happened after the vote.
This looks like every campaign that Obama has been in. He always tries to get rid of the competition by getting them thrown off the ballot. SOP
::I don’t agree on 17; but just clarifying the conversation::
This bogus lawsuit against McCain should be tossed for the same reason that the suit against Obama in Philadelphia should be tossed. In neither case does the plaintiff have any standing to sue. And I’d like to see the judge in both instances make the plaintiffs pay compensation for the costs.
In neither case does the plaintiff have any standing to sue.
***Then who would have standing? This is a constitutional issue, going to whether a person is fraudulently representing his eligibility to be president, in Obama’s case. In McCain’s case it was probably expected to see this kind of nonsense because he went through it in 2000 & got that “sense of the senate” in his favor...
Then it isn't a matter for a civil suit. In order to sue the plaintiff has to show damages. What damage did McCain's running for president cause this person?
Our voting on a person was not deemed a hiring process since the employment process happened after the vote.
***This thing really is ending up in the republicans’ hands, and they are going to wank the handoff of Berg vs. Obama & blow the whole deal.
What damage did McCain’s running for president cause this person?
***I dunno, but in the Berg vs. Obama lawsuit, it mentioned that there were $millions collected in the fraud. I answered your question, now how about answering mine — who would have standing?
Brilliant idea----Calpernia never fails to come up with moves that protect the best interests of Americans.
Bravo Calpenia.
I did answer it. Someone who suffered damages through the actions of the person they are suing. What damages did Berg himself suffer?
Nothing bravo about failure. Maybe, just maybe, the politicians will be entered in the eVerify program upon hiring? Makes sense to me; but I don’t know.
What damages did Berg himself suffer?
***I dunno. Headaches, maybe.
I’d love to see Duncan Hunter file a formal complaint about the Natural Born Citizenship status of Obama and ask for access to the birth certificate so that forensic analysis could be done.
What a cast of characters. Empty suit Obama the Rock Star (by itself a reason not to vote for him); nasty, loony tunes John McCain; the evil-eyed Cindy (photos were posted on a FR thread which showed her with an evil stare); now Palin exposing her pregnant under-aged daughter to trashing.
This election would make blockbuster film with race, sex, adultery, money, drugs, embezzlement, amnesty, mental issues, Hillary, fears of Manchurian Candidate.
The founders were right. Who knows, we might get some nabob that hangs around Ayers and other commies.
Now that it's on the internet---pressure should be applied.
We need eVerified (1) candidates (2) individuals working for them, (3) indivduals working in the US govt.
eVerify should become a natural part of the process in light of the massive infiltration of the US by agents of foreign governments.
===============================================
REFERENCE
McCain's so-called Hispanic Outreach operator---Juan Hernandez----is a dual US/Mexico citizen--who headed the Mexican "Ministry of Mexicans Living in the US."
Hernandez told Cong Tancredo "The Ministry" exists to increase the flow of Mexicans to the US-----TO SERVE Mexico’s needs including: $50 billion annual remittances to Mexico (30% of Mexico's GDP); employment for Mexico's exploding population, to alleviate Mexican social instability, and to provide job training for Mexicans THAT THEY WILL BRING BACK TO MEXICO."
Hernandez told Tancredo" "By Mexico populating the US with millions of Hispanics tied economically, politically and linguistically to Mexico, our government is able to exert enormous influence and pressure on US policy and its dealings with Mexico."
TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH: Get ready for a massive transfer of US wealth to greedy federales in the Mexican hellhole.
===============================================
The sap-happy whining about "hopeless people" looking for a "better life" is a bunch of nonsense. Hernandez and other Third World gov't agents have infiltrated the US political system for ONE REASON: to effect a massive transfer of US wealth. Third World federales are salivating at the thought.
History shows the Huns, the Vandals, and the Barbarians used force to takeover a country to loot its resources.
Third World parasites like Hernandez conquer by co-opting the US political system---with smiles and promises of latino votes.
We need eVerify to ward off lettuce pickers in camouflage and shoulder holsters roaming our streets, shooting to kill Americans who dare to rebel against reconquista.
If that were grounds for a suit then I can think of dozens of people I could take to court.
markomalley put to rest:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2065437/posts?page=52#52
8 U.S.C. § 1403. Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904
(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
(b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
Please note subparagraph b.
Bravo for picking up on—and laying to waste—the jurisdictional mumbo-jumbo claimed by the legal team. I fully concur as far as your analysis of THAT goes.
But sadly, as Kevmo pointed out, it IS McCAIN’s TEAM that is working(unwittingly I’m sure) against Philip Berg’s valiant and principled stand in Berg v. Obama/DNC/FEC; they should instead have this suit thrown out on OTHER more relevant grounds...like, the senate having already passed a resolution recognizing McCain as eligible for POTUS, along with an aircraft carrier-load of statutory support and obvious parentally-transmitted congenital citizenship, clear exclusive national loyalty, etc.
Berg v. Obama hinges mainly on issues of possible fraud, along with dual citizenship, divided national loyalties, and so on. Therefore, it is an entirely different animal than this laughable attempt to disqualify McCain.
What a circus this season is becoming.
Men in Black, Chapter 11, pages 159 to 174:
“The Court Counts the Ballots”
I have a strong suspicion that Mark Levin might have something to say about this. I hope to hear him address this tonight.
No “standing” is also a silly basis for trying to have it thrown out. Kevmo’s right—if ANY given citizen can’t be said to suffer damage by having an ineligible POTUS, then who the hell WOULD be said to have standing?
As I see it—not being a lawyer myself or anything, just having listened to them debate law every day for 8 years or so—a case like this and Berg v. Obama is plainly best packaged as a CLASS ACTION on behalf of the electorate.
“McCain should truly be all over Obama over Obama’s fake birth certificate!”
Maybe he doesn’t want to lose his nice squeaky chew toy.
If they are so confident, why not argue the merits instead of a technucality?
My fantasy would be:
1. Obama gets trounced in an actual campaign
2. After Obama loses, the truth comes out about his BC.
3. After this election, the truth comes out about the Clintonista.
An intriguing aspect to the whole mix of these suits and the balls of wax that roll around within them is this(based on the information I’ve seen so far): Here we have the McCain team actually trying to fight, to openly try to answer and have the suit against their candidate thrown out; basically, stepping up to the confrontation and engaging at some level.
Meanwhile, we have the Obama camp apparently not even being attributed in any report that I’ve read with any kind of response or acknowledgment that Berg v. Obama even exists; if they have in fact successfully been served, I’d really be surprised, because last I knew, Berg said in interviews that service was being attempted and there was a run-around at the FEC, etc., but nary a peep from the official Obammunists.
I suspect the signs point to confidence in McCain’s legitimacy, and cowering evasiveness and reluctance to engage due to knowing fraud by Obama.
Would that all your fantasies become realities.
The Acitivism sidebar is reserved for News/Activism of the FR chapters.
Not this.
BTTT
He's not president.
I know. This is a non-issue and a frivilous lawsuit which should be thrown out on any number of grounds. Not the least of which the fact that the plaintiff has no standing in the issue.
What are Maquiladoras? The Maquiladora Industry At Made In Mexico, Inc. we would be delighted to walk you through the A to Zs of Maquiladoras and the Mexico manufacturing industry and explain how it can net big gains for your organization's bottom line. And by that we mean savings up to 75% or more off your labor costs!
The word Maquiladoras comes from colonial Mexico, where millers charged a "maquila" for processing other people's grain. Today the same term is used to describe companies that process (assemble and/or transform in some way) components imported into Mexico which are, in turn, exported - usually to the United States. Terms that are synonymous with Maquiladoras include: offshore operations, production sharing, twin plants and in-bond.
------------------------------------------
Video: McCain asked about Juan Hernandez at Florida campaign event
>>>History shows the Huns, the Vandals, and the Barbarians used force to takeover a country to loot its resources.
Persia fell from the social impact of immigration.
I don’t think anyone doubts McCain is a citizen. I think the question is about being born in Colon makes you natural or naturalized.
A court can, and must, enjoin someone if it’s shown that a fraud is underway which will, if its intent is later manifest, result in a tort.
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.