Posted on 10/27/2011 8:22:46 AM PDT by GregNH
On 10/25/11 Liberty Legal Foundation filed two simultaneous lawsuits against the Democratic Party. Both lawsuits request injunctions prohibiting the Party from certifying that Obama is Constitutionally qualified to run for the office of President in the 2012 election. Without such a certification from the Party, Obama will not appear on any ballot in the 2012 general election. (Tennessee TN Complaint) (Federal DNC Complaint)
Neither lawsuit discuss Obama’s place of birth or his birth certificate. These issues are completely irrelevant to our argument. LLF’s lawsuit simply points out that the Supreme Court has defined “natural-born citizen” as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Obama can never be a natural-born citizen. His place of birth is irrelevant.
(Excerpt) Read more at libertylegalfoundation.net ...
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.
At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar See references in post 69 and a book belonging to John Adams here
Thanx for stopping by. I have some issues with these filings.
There are some allegations being made in the briefs that are not true, like his travel to Pakistan. It has shown that one could enter Pakistan at that time. And there is even some strong evidence he worked for the CIA and of course there would be no passport problems with that.
I bring this up because if one can pick apart part of the brief as being false then it throws the rest of it in doubt and that would clearly be a problem.
I guess Obots only work until 3, and I am sure they get a 45 minute clean up time before punching out....
PreambleWe the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
"We the People" are citizens of the United States. "Our Posterity" are the natural born who follow -- the children of the People. The Constitution was "ordained and established" to "secure... Liberty" to its citizens and their children.
Whom else was the Constitution established to secure, if not the citizen People and their citizen children?
How else would the Founders attempt to secure the United States of America if not by limiting the qualifications for the highest office to the People and their Posterity that was the reason for establishing the Constitution in the first place?
-PJ
She told us that it is popularly believed that anyone born in the USA can be president, but, she said that has yet to be proved because it was always believed that Citizen parents were required before the 14th amendment, and every president has had citizen parents in the past.
I remember this like it was yesterday. 40 plus years ago in a New Jersey public school, and the teacher was Miss Nauta.
The Constitution was signed in September 1987, so no.
Please be so kind as to inform me how people back at the time the Constitution was written could prove their citizenship. It wasn’t until the 1919 that the first birth certificate was issued. Back then all births were recorded in Church documents and it is unlikely that the parents place of birth was mentioned. Curious!
You can’t be serious. Do you think babies feel out of the sky? And yes you recorded your births in the family Bible, what’s wrong with that? Were we supposed to have “Newspaper Announcements?” God knows that would have done it.
If “natural-born citizen” requires two citizen parents, then would a child of a citizen and a non-citizen be a “natural-born citizen” of no country at all? What if a child were born to a US citizen single mother and the citizenship (and perhaps even the identity) of the father is unknown?
the filings are being handled by van irion. he is a patriot. that is all i need to know. i supported him early on as a candidate in the tea party wave. he’s one of the few tea party activists who can be trusted, who has come through consistently with the promises made.
he has continued the fight, mainly against obamacare, with our support, urging and his dedication. we expand the front against obama and take the offensive (as the repubs will not) with the additional suits.
our obamacare suit the only one targeting the real problem — roosevelt’s packed court and wickard — with the misconstruing of the commerce clause. this with abortion and public education are the jewels in the statists’ crown.
our overall strategy is lincoln and grant. we stretch obama’s defense and cause him to use up precious resources. we also must expose his background, whatever it is. his background is still being effectively covered up. we need to know how he ticks to fight him. the suit also aim at that goal.
we fight on and hope for God’s intervention and obama’s mistakes which, btw, he has to be forced into. he won’t make unforced errors for the feckless repubs. we strike in small ways but in as many ways possible. we use the left’s methods against them. we fight on for 100 years if necessary.
Of course I’m serious. How did the presidents before 1900 PROVE they were natural born citizens? A family bible proves nothing.
Oh that's right I forgot you were an atheist.
Look, all the "We The People" that were here when the Constitution was adopted became Citizens, thus all the babies born after the adoption became natural born Citizens.
What is so hard to understand?
thus all the babies born after the adoption became natural born Citizens.
Then by that reasoning (without PROOF) Obummer is a U.S. citizen because he claims he was born in the US. I apologize for misunderstanding you. I thought you were part of the Birther movement. Sorry!
“The Constitution was signed in September 1987, so no.”
Assuming you meant 1787, well, yes, but it wasn’t ratified until June of ‘88. The 1st Congress didn’t meet until March of ‘89, passing the Naturalization Act one year later, in March of ‘90. That leaves a window of two years between the existence of the U.S. and the act, which hardly counts as not having “a naturalization process back then.”
Do you honestly think they couldn’t have had naturalized citizens in mind for the Senate because there wasn’t a naturalization act until one measly year after Congress first met?
“’We the People’ are citizens of the United States”
How could they be, when the U.S. didn’t yet exist?
“How else would the Founders attempt to secure the United States of America if not by limiting the qualifications for the highest office to the People and their Posterity that was the reason for establishing the Constitution in the first place?”
By limiting them to people born citizens, which they did.
“Wow, I’m impressed. You actually admitted you made a mistake.”
You are a jerk.
“You would be wrong. I remember the question being posed about John McCain the first time he ran for President, in 2000. But, that would be before your time on FR.”
That would have nothing to do with the distinction, if any, between native and natural born citizens, of which I was speaking. McCain was born outside of the U.S. to two citizen parents, a whole other issue.
Thank you.
Coming from you, I consider it a complement.
“Thank you.
Coming from you, I consider it a complement.”
No, no, thank you, for confirming my theory (that you are a jerk).
I see. So, any discussion about the criteria for a natural born citizen prior to the nomination of Obama can't possibly be relevant to the issue, simply because you claimed that it must not have occurred.
You really do have a problem admitting when you made a mistake, don't you?
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.