Posted on 11/20/2008 11:46:54 PM PST by STARWISE
RESOLUTION
Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.
Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ of the United States; Whereas the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;
Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;
Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’;
Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country outside of our national borders;
Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936:
Now, therefore, be it 1 Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘nat2 ural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Con3 stitution of the United States.
VerDate Aug 31 2005 22:18 Apr 28, 2008 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SR511.RS SR511 hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
bump...
They better make sure the Constitution is upheld. I certainly do think they’ll take the case.
Correct, because they rejected any clause that would have broadened the scope of NB status that the Senator was attempting to inject into SR511.
Petition signed.
Over 15,000 so far.
I understand that they require 2/3 of the states to ratify an ammendment. That will not matter.
If he was forced to relinquish citizenship as a child to become an Indonesian citizen - and is therefore no longer a natural born citizen - they will pass a law that states natural born children are incapable of deciding for themselves and therefore cannot relinquish their status until the age of consent.
Basically they will state that a parent may relinquish citizenship of their child but the natural born status returns if the child once again becomes a citizen of the US.
The only thing they cannot overcome is if he was actually born in Kenya as a Kenyan citizen. No getting around that....but they will do their best to find a way.
There is zero chance he will not be sworn in on time in January. None. Whatever political manuvering or language contortions they have to do to get him there, he will be there taking the oath.
Our Forefather’s in their wisdom established our government in three parts to check and balance each other. They specifically stated the requirements for the office of the president.
THe SCOTUS has sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Unfortunately the founders did not establish who would vet each candidate to determine eligibility.
Nor did they establish “standing” if such a case were ever to be presented.. Standing , a arbitrary term established for the smooth working of the judiciary system, is not a condition established by the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has no choice but to hear and act in mass on at least one of these cases......The COnstitution is in crisis.
I would think that would be the job of the Supreme Court. They are the ones charged with swearing in the President. Since they are charged with upholding the Constitution, they would be obligated to ensure that the person they are swearing in is qualified for the office.
Since this issue has been brought to their attention, I think they are obligated to rule on it before the electoral college votes. I think it would be a dereliction of the constitutional duties to refuse to consider it. They may be free to ignore the evidence and rule any way they please, but I do believe they have an obligation to consider the issue.
I agree. It has to be Scotus. They interpret the constitution and they swear in the president.
The states have no jurisdiction over the electoral college. Even if the state has laws, the electors are free to vote for anybody they want. State laws mandating that electors follow the popular vote are unconstitutional. The state sends a delegate of electors and they are free to do as they please.
It makes sense, but since it's never been an issue before who knows?
All the evidence indicates he was not born here, or if he was his mother renounced his citizenship so he could attend an Islamic school in Indonesia. But can anyone see the SCOTUS invalidating his election? I don't think they will do it.
If they had in front of them evidence that Obama was not a citizen, I’m fairly certain that Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito would not be silent.
Oh, goody, our first coup. Now we can be like all the other countries.
Yeah, probably. I just like to keep a little bit of hope alive so I don’t get thoroughly depressed.
Donofrios arguement has nothing to do with Obama, it was the status of his father. Since Obamas father was a British subject, Obama is not considered natural born per the Constitution.
I have read the passages referring to 0’s birth. Where does he admit to any Nationality?
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.