I'm sure it will be assumed at the outset that Hussein is,in fact,Constitutionally qualified.And if the defendant tries to demand that a genuine birth certificate be presented the trial judge (who,ultimately,answers directly to Hussein) will probably rule that such a demand will not be allowed.
|
I'm sure it will be assumed at the outset that Hussein is, in fact, Constitutionally qualified. Perhaps, but as any legal expert who's honest will tell you, our Framers did NOT specifically define "natural-born Citizen", just as they did not define "to keep and bear arms". In 2008, the legally-interpreted definition of "to keep and bear arms" was FINALLY defined by Justice Scalia in the DC v. Heller opinion, setting straight nearly 70 years of bad Local, State and Federal laws that relied on the poorly-written US v. Heller (1939) opinion. As Minor v. Happersett (1874) instructs us: "The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that." This refers to the texts used by the Framers at the time in 1787: Vattel's Law of Nations and/or Blackstone's Commentaries. Either by Constitutional Amendment or by US Supreme Court decree will we ever have the Framer's Constitutional definition of "natural-born Citizen". BUT to get there, we must have a person who has legal Standing and Jurisdiction, and the Courts have to willing to push through the partisan swamp of Political Question. Let's pray that after 233 years, Lt Col Lakin is that person. |