Posted on 04/16/2010 4:26:38 AM PDT by BCW
WND Exclusive BORN IN THE USA? D.C. court case demands Obama explain eligibility Contends president's allegiance is to Britain, Kenya, Indonesia Posted: January 29, 2010 12:20 am Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2010 WorldNetDaily A prominent attorney who has shepherded a number of high-profile legal cases challenging Barack Obama'seligibility to be president has brought a "Quo Warranto" case to district court in Washington, D.C., alleging his allegiances have included Britain, Kenya and Indonesia. A Quo Warranto action, first recorded some 800 years ago, essentially is a demand to know by what authority a public figure is acting. The case, brought by California attorney Orly Taitz on behalf of herself, was assigned to Chief Judge Royce Lamberth. Taitz told WND that in a separate action she has filed a notice of appeal with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals of the dismissal of a case she brought on behalf of Ambassador Alan Keyes and dozens of other individuals in California challenging Obama's eligibility. She previously attempted Quo Warranto cases on behalf of government officials, without response. This time she filed the action directly with the court on her own behalf. "The case revolves around the federal question of eligibility of the president under Quo Warranto," she wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
O'really? Neither newspaper lists his name so I'd like to know how O'BOR knows it's Hussein's.
-------------------------------------------------
BOR does the SAME thing he accuses others of doing....hiding under his desk.
And most interesting is who was on the 6 member committee that presented the resolution. One was Hillary. Another was Hussein himself.
It is my view that the laws at the time said that despite the fact that his mother was a US citizen, she was sufficiently young that giving birth to him would NOT confer "natural born citizenship" status. That law has been summarized and linked to multiple times on these threads.
The constitutional qualifications remain, but the way one can qualify for such status is modified by legislation.
This was on Leahy’s own site but it’s been recently scrubbed. But you can read the behind the scenes of SR511, including Chertoff’s two US citizen parents agreement, here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25337874/SR511-Technically-a-Dfinition-of-NATURAL-BORN-CITIZEN
Your whit is sharp and entertaining. Keep up the good work.
You’re right, “respecting the constitution is important, but so is respecting the decisions of citizens, states, congress, and the supreme court.” Would you like to read Obama’s decision on the definition? Here tis:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25337874/SR511-Technically-a-Dfinition-of-NATURAL-BORN-CITIZEN
(popcorn)
;-]
http://totalbuzz.freedomblogging.com/2010/04/16/birthplace-lawyer-has-another-suit-dismissed/33929/
“It is at least the fifth time Taitz has had a case thrown out.”
You DO realize that resolution addresses someone born OVERSEAS? That it has nothing to do with someone born in the USA?
Yup, no one can get a HI bc if they weren’t born in HI - NOT.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/sun-yat-sen-dh-1.jpg
““This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by [the] Constitution,” Lamberth wrote in a decision published on April 14. “This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2010/04/judge-dismisses-suit-by-birther-activist-orly-taitz.html
At some point, birthers need to ask themselves why they keep losing.
Page xviii (down at the bottom), Statute II - 1790...Naturalization.
Got it.
Thanks.
As has been pointed out above, Justice Thomas, et al are “evading” the issue.
If even Justice Thomas is “evading” the issue, then just how do you expect to win anything?
The fight is not in the courts, but in getting conservatives into Congress.
While I disagree with many here on birther issues, I just saw this and hope we can agree this is good news - concealed carry & Arizona:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2494652/posts
Better yet, some constitutionalists.
Like my new tagline?
“It is at least the fifth time Taitz has had a case thrown out.”"
Interesting that Judge Lamberth states:
"THIS IS A FINAL APPEALABLE ORDER"
Is that the "norm?" To state in the denial, that it's "appealable?"
In any event, I'm sure we'll see this appealed to SCOTUS next.
Apparently you do not realize that your posts 156 & 157 repeat my point - that the resolution had nothing to do with Obama (assuming Obama was born in Hawaii).
Someone overseas needs to be born to 2 US citizens to qualify as ‘natural born’. Someone born in the USA does not, since his birth should give him allegiance to the US - unless BOTH his parents were foreigners.
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.
