Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Danae
IMO, they can go back even further, in respect to the legal history of Georgia, and cite the state charter of Georgia which makes two clear distinctions between those who are natural-born and those who are just born there:
Also we do, for ourselves and successors, declare, by these presents, that all and every the persons which shall happen to be born within the said province, and every of their children and posterity, shall have and enjoy all liberties, franchises and immunities of free denizens and natural born subjects, within any of our dominions, to all intents and purposes, as if abiding and born within this our kingdom of Great-Britain, or any other of our dominions.
- - -
unto such our Loving subjects, natural born, denizens or others that shall be willing to become our subjects, and live under our allegiance in the said colony, upon such terms ...

The children of the subjects and denizens, born in Georgia, became natural-born subjects or denizens. The bolded part in the second paragraph above emphasizes they are talking about different classes of persons, not one class with multiple characterizations.

217 posted on 01/20/2012 12:37:50 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies ]


To: edge919; Kenny Bunk
Just to add (as I have little doubt you are already aware) that denizen has multiple meanings among civilians, but Black's Law Dictionary (7th edition) reads as follows:

denizen 1. A person given certain rights in a foreign nation or living habitually in a foreign nation. 2 English law A person who holds a position midway between being an alien and a natural-born or naturalized subject.

Methinks Hatfield is being badass indeed in his letter/motion, and I have every confidence that this choice of wording has the full attention of Mahili, Jablonski, and even Obama. Allegorically, this is probably as close to "circling in for the kill" on the Discovery Channel as it gets in the court system.

Having stated that, Kenny Bunk seems correct that this is the first of several steps. One could speculate that if Obama won't provide documentation that he has in his possession that he is qualified for the office he currently holds, it is prima facie evidence of mental incompetence and he should be immediately replaced per the XXV Amendment. IMHO only a traitor or an insane person would drag the country kicking and screaming through a SCOTUS hearing because of the Constitutional crisis it would herald if the imminent decision were to go against Obama. If so, someone (someone very powerful, no doubt) will have a quiet chat with Obama about ALL of the potential consequences of throwing the civilized world and financial markets into confusion and doubt, and be invited to resign. Markets hate uncertainty, and Obama has been dishing it out ever since he took office. One way... or another... the problem will be solved, perhaps more quickly than the legal world is ordinarily geared to expect.

223 posted on 01/20/2012 2:01:25 PM PST by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies ]

To: edge919; SteveH
...unto such our Loving subjects, natural born, denizens or others that shall be willing to become our subjects, and live under our allegiance in the said colony, upon such terms ...

I was wondering when someone would notice that nice word "denizen" by Hatfield.

Nice term. ;-)

227 posted on 01/20/2012 2:15:45 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson