Posted on 05/24/2010 5:30:46 PM PDT by rxsid
A rule 28(j) letter has just been filed in Hollister v. Soetoro citing the actual language of Vattel from his 1756 treatise and David Ramsay’s essay as well as St. George Tucker’s American edition of Blackstone with commentaries on the Constitution in contrast to the common law.
From the letter:
Re:Hollister v. Soetoro, No. 09-5080, consolidating No. 09-5161http://www.scribd.com/doc/31897641/HOLLISTER-v-SOETORO-JOINT-LETTER-FILED-Advising-of-Additional-AuthoritiesDear Sir:
I write pursuant to Rule 28(j) to bring to the attention of the Court supplemental authority which has come to our attention since we filed our briefs in the case, now under reconsideration. This authority is about the issue of the phrase “natural born citizen” in Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution, which is central to our contention that if the allegations of the complaint be taken as true a case was made and the said central issue should have been treated, but wasn’t. In prior filings we cited the 19th century case authority pointing to the work of Vattel on the Law of Nations as the origin of the thinking behind that phrase. (pp.5, 35-6)
Now we cite Vattel in his“Le Droit des Gens ou Principes de la Loi Naturelle 1758 (English 1759) from Vol. 1 (of 2) Chpt. XIX, 212, Des citoyens et naturels: “Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pays, de parens citoyens.” Unmistakably he says that those are natural born citizens who are born in the country of citizen parents.
David Ramsay, founding father from South Carolina who served in the Continental Congress in 1782-83 and 1785-86, wrote early histories of the founding. In his 1789 essay “A Dissertation on the Manners of Acquiring the Character and Privileges of a Citizen” pp. 6-7 describes the “natural born citizen” as one born in the country of citizen parents. He knew all the participants and worked with them in his role as a member of the Congress.
St. George Tucker emigrated from Bermuda before the Revolution, in which he fought extensively. He married the widowed mother of John Randolph of Roanoke, by whom he had two children. He taught law for years at William and Mary. In 1804 he published the leading American version of Blackstone of the time, in which he correlated Blackstone with the Constitution. In the Appendix to Vol. 1, Note D, Sec. 14 he makes clear that the Framers relied upon Vattel’s definition above, not the common law concept concerning “subjects.” He gives examples why.
Sincerely yours,
/s/
John D. Hemenway
HOLLISTER v. SOETORO - JOINT LETTER FILED - advising of additional authorities.
Nice
WE can only hope this results in the POS 0dumbo not being able to run in 12
BUMP
If you have the time and inclination, could you give me the gist of this filing? I’m a little out of the loop, but very interested.
If he's truly not Constitutionally eligible, then the usurper's entire "Presidency" should be made null and void. Including, but not limited to his SCOTUS picks as well as anything he has signed into law. Difficult and far reaching? Indeed.
I had read on a blog (I forget which) that members of the Adams family (Massachusetts) and Jefferson family (Virginia) had evidence of the origin and definition of Natural Born Citizenship, and the history of its inclusion in the U.S. Constitution, within their family archives.
Their stated intentions were at the proper time to step forward and offer their family’s records as supporting evidence in any Supreme Court cases challenging Obama’s eligibility.
I wonder about this latest event, and if it is a portent to an approaching flood of supporting documents.
The historical record must be set strait so as to prevent, as much as possible, a recurrence of someone born a subject to a foreign crown becoming our Commander in Chief simply because large numbers of people in this country are literally too ignorant of their countries history, or too preoccupied with American Idol to care.
His precedent must not be allowed to stand.
I want a historical verdict condemning him for eternity.
Basically, the lawyer for the plaintiff has filled a letter advising (the court) of additional authorities found, Ramsay (reaffirming Vattel's definition for NBC as born in country to citizen parents) and St. George Tucker where he ("makes clear that the Framers relied upon Vattel’s definition above, not the common law concept concerning “subjects").
In other words, Barry (a/k/a Obama) would not be considered a "Natural Born Citizen" because he was born to a foreign father, and Barry himself inherited (by birthright) his foreign fathers foreign citizenship [assuming, of course, that Sr. was his legal father at birth]. No matter where he was born Barry, was born a subject to the crown of her majesty the Queen of England. The framers would never have considered someone with dual allegiance at birth to be considered a natural born citizen. It contradicts the very meaning of the term as known by them in 1787.
The fact they included Tucker is, IMHO, a very good sign since the SC has already accepted it as foundational law in another case.
Largely forgotten today, Tucker returned to some legal prominence last Term, when the majority in District of Columbia v. Heller cited his annotated Blackstone’s Commentaries as proof that the Second Amendment had originally been understood as an individual right to arms.
Northwestern University Law Review
Thanks for the update.
His precedent must not be allowed to stand.
You said it brother. Amen and amen.
Furthermore, I don't care WHICH party the candidate comes from:
* not the Republican Party;
* not the Democrat Party;
* not the Peace and Freedom Party;
* not the American Independent Party;
* not the Green Party;
* not the Libertarian Party;
* not even the Communist Party!
NOT ONE of the candidates from ANY party should be allowed to run for President unless they can absolutely prove natural born citizenship.
Joe Biden’s position as VP. He would not be able to serve due to Obama’s eligibility and fraud.
And Nancy Pelosi knowledge beforehand of the fraud being imposed. There are two different forms of eligibility to the states thus indicating she knew!
Wow, that was a GREAT summary! Thanks for putting me some knowledge (as they say on Ace of Spades, long story). I am hoping and praying this case goes somewhere. It sounds so promising, but the judges in this country just don’t seem interested in giving us a fair hearing.
Their stated intentions were at the proper time to step forward and offer their family’s records as supporting evidence in any Supreme Court cases challenging Obama’s eligibility.
I wonder about this latest event, and if it is a portent to an approaching flood of supporting documents.
Yes. I remember that as well.
Adams papers, Lee family papers to prove NBC in Constitution came from Vattel?
Its best that in 2012 , during the election, he is outed as a fraud, by the people, and sent packing by the people.
We dont want scotus to rule on this. We want 60 percent of the people demanding an American be elected president. We want him leaving out the back door, hiding his face in shame.
Joe Biden’s position as VP. He would not be able to serve due to Obama’s eligibility and fraud.
And Nancy Pelosi knowledge beforehand of the fraud being imposed. There are two different forms of eligibility to the states thus indicating she knew!
Indeed! That's why many are (rightfully) calling this a Constitutional crisis.
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.