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

Skip to comments.

Supremes to review citizenship arguments-Case challenging candidacy set for 'conference' of justices
World Net Daily ^ | 11-21-08 | Bob Unruh

Posted on 11/20/2008 11:46:54 PM PST by STARWISE

A case that challenges President-elect Barack Obama's name on the 2008 election ballot citing questions over his citizenship has been scheduled for a "conference" at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Conferences are private meetings of the justices at which they review cases and decide which ones to accept for formal review.

This case is set for a conference Dec. 5, just 10 days before the Electoral College is scheduled to meet to make formal the election of Obama as the nation's next president.

The Supreme Court's website listed the date for the case brought by Leo C. Donofrio against Nina Wells, the secretary of state in New Jersey, over not only Obama's name on the 2008 election ballot but those of two others, Sen. John McCain and Roger Calero.

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: bho2008; birthcertificate; calero; certifigate; justicethomas; leodonofrio; madeinkenya; mccain; notthisshiitagain; obama; obamatruthfile; obamatruthsquad; scotus; thekenyan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-299 next last
To: Cicero; All
I need you all to go read this link. I realize it is on Wikipedia which some find false, but this man ran for President of the United States. It is alarming to say the least. Just read it and you will understand! This is also for those that believe that Obama would have been fully vetted and that the RNC would have gone after them. They would not for fear of being considered racist. This was the whole point behind BO believing he would get through.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B3ger_Calero
261 posted on 11/22/2008 11:03:56 AM PST by jcsjcm (Upholding the Constitution til my last breath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B3ger_Calero


262 posted on 11/22/2008 11:09:51 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Aurorales
I have learned it is MY JOB as a citizen of the US to stand with others and fight to, as you say, secure the blessings of liberty for us all.

And that is probably the toughest lesson we all have to learn from this state of affairs.

Those we have entrusted to hold our freedoms in place have failed us. I think it would be safe to say, that it is those very people who have done the most to destroy our freedoms.

The Representative class has gone from being simply derelict in their duties, to being avowed and knowing enemies of The People.

What's obvious to me, is that the people have allowed this state of affairs to worsen to this level, through their own misguided trust in those representatives and gov't agencies, but also because of their own dereliction of duty to themselves and their countrymen.

It appears to me that this country is headed for "change" of some sort. We are all going to be involved in it, whether we want to, or not. Every one of us is responsible for the condition of this nation (good and bad) through our action or inaction.

We can all wait for a seminal event to make a choice on what to do, but the fight has already begun. We're losing because too many of us don't see that we're under attack, and are not fighting back.

When that seminal, triggering event does come, we will all have a choice; to either become cause, or to remain effect (as we are now). Let us hope that by that time, we're still in a position to even make that choice.

263 posted on 11/22/2008 11:32:17 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: penelopesire

Sorry Miss Penny, I have gone back to July to get a closer look and I did find this, but there is much more on the topic and the 3 separate pieces of proposed legislation that culminated in this resolution 511.

From this post:

..why did Senators McCaskill and Obama reportedly insert the following Clause?”

10/14/2008 8:13:02 PM PDT · by ransomnote · 16 replies · 1,280+ views
texasdarlin.wordpress.com ^ | By Judah Benjamin,
“2d Session S. RES. 511: Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.: In the Senate of the United States.” was Sponsored by Senator McCaskill and co-sponsored by Senators Leahy, Obama, Coburn, Clinton and Webb. Why? Why were Democratic Senators trying to pass a Resolution making Senator McCain undoubtedly Legally Eligible when this issue had already been cleared up in 2000 and again in 2004? And why did Senators McCaskill and Obama reportedly insert the following Clause? “Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to...


264 posted on 11/22/2008 3:06:43 PM PST by Gemsbok (Follow the trail,...,.,.,.,..... I know where it leads)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Gemsbok

Thanks for all of your efforts. This is enough to make even the most skeptical person pause and wonder what the democrats are up to in regards to Obama’s BC status. There is so much smoke here, you can’t see the fire!! I just hope it is resolved before he is sworn into office.


265 posted on 11/23/2008 6:04:56 AM PST by penelopesire ("The only CHANGE you will get with the Democrats is the CHANGE left in your pocket")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: penelopesire

Agreed, see if you can locate the 3 attempts to modify the law and his exact wording.


266 posted on 11/23/2008 6:11:56 AM PST by Gemsbok (Follow the trail,...,.,.,.,..... I know where it leads)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: Gemsbok

I will try to do that later today and will ping you if I find it.


267 posted on 11/23/2008 6:51:24 AM PST by penelopesire ("The only CHANGE you will get with the Democrats is the CHANGE left in your pocket")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: penelopesire

NEW THREAD ON CASE:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2136532/posts?q=1&;page=201#201


268 posted on 11/23/2008 7:47:17 AM PST by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

Thanks for the link. Listening to #6 of the Donofrio interviews right now. His case is the most promising and important imho because it will actually compel the justices to DEFINE/spell out ‘natural born citizen’ in our constitution. This needs to be done before Obama stacks the court with more leftists that believe that anyone..anywhere should be able to become POTUS!!

If the dems and Obama succeed in setting this precedent, then what is to stop future anchor babies of illegals from becoming President of the United States?


269 posted on 11/23/2008 7:57:12 AM PST by penelopesire ("The only CHANGE you will get with the Democrats is the CHANGE left in your pocket")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: CapnJack

So in your mind, nothing is worth defending? Not even the document that gave Americans their freedom? Why is it that people have come to love communism instead of rightfully fearing it?


270 posted on 11/23/2008 9:29:48 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
The Constitution has been pissed on for the past 100 years. It is torn up daily by agenda driven politicians, layers, and judges.

If this case was to come before the SCOTUS it would be a dispatched quickly in obama’s favor so as not to piss off the people or alter the election.

The majority of americans don't want to be bother with Constitutional “mombo-jombo”, they just want their big screen TV's, 30 packs of beer, big comfy chair/couch, and free medical care (or so they think).

Apathy is the key word here, people just don't give a you-know-what! They want obama, so they are going to get him ... period. And no Constitutional prohibition is going to stop them from getting what they want ... which is communism, a command economy, and a dictator (although they don't know it yet).

271 posted on 11/23/2008 12:06:57 PM PST by CapnJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: CapnJack
If this case was to come before the SCOTUS it would be a dispatched quickly in obama’s favor so as not to piss off the people or alter the election.

It is before the SCOTUS and they have to decide what to do with it now. Why don't you help them by sending them mail reminding them that we know what their duty is, no matter how unpopular.

How can any American let the communists win?
272 posted on 11/23/2008 12:33:57 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

“Why don’t you help them by sending them mail reminding them that we know what their duty is, no matter how unpopular.”

Do you really think they care what you or I think? Do you really think they even read (their staffers that is) letters sent to them by the great unwashed?

Come on! The only time politicians and judges care what people think of is on election day. After that, they do what they please. They do what is in THEIR best self interest.


273 posted on 11/23/2008 2:26:02 PM PST by CapnJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: CapnJack

We can impeach them it is within our power. So, why should they ignore us? I wonder why so many people on this forum are embracing defeat and forgoing their duty to defend the US Constitution, and make sure it is upheld?


274 posted on 11/23/2008 2:48:20 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm; jacquej
You are incorrect, she is a natural born U.S. citizen as both of her parents are U.S. citizens and were U.S. residents at the time of her birth. Just because she was born across the border is meaningless.

I find it highly insulting that if my wife and I were stationed overseas that our children born there would not have the same status as I. That would be a sh*tty thing to do to the children of the men and women that defend our freedoms. That would not be a Constitution worth defending.

275 posted on 11/23/2008 4:07:13 PM PST by 7mmMag@LeftCoast (The DNC and Rino's: they put the CON into congress everyday.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: 7mmMag@LeftCoast

There is a clause for military persons stationed overseas. Whether born by air, sea, or land your citizenship would prevail and your child would be considered natural born. The person I was referring to was not military (I don’t believe) so although their citizenship would lay claim to the child, she would be considered a citizen and not a natural born.

I may be incorrect, but I do believe that it only carries weight if you are military! You would be protected since you are fighting for our country. I didn’t mean to offend you at all!


276 posted on 11/24/2008 7:06:58 AM PST by jcsjcm (Upholding the Constitution til my last breath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: Flamenco Lady
Thanks for posting this reference. So if I read this correctly, if a person has two parents that are U.S. Citizens at the time of their birth, they could be born anywhere in the world, and still be a natural born citizen. Hence, McCain would be a natural born citizen.

Correct, and IIRC, this principle is reflected in US law.

If a person had a father who was not a U.S. Citizen they would not be considered a natural born U.S. citizen. Hence, Obama would not be a natural born citizen.

That may be correct under general common law, but common law can be modified by statute. I doubt American law still reflects this common-law principle.

277 posted on 11/24/2008 7:16:31 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: jacquej
So, she had dual citizenship, and didn’t declare for the US until she needed to, sometime around her 21st birthday. Is she eligible to be President?

I assume at least one of you was a US citizen? If so, she is a natural-born citizen of the US. I'm actually surprised she is considered a Canadian citizen, AFAIK, Canada does not grant citizenship based solely on birth in that country, but I could be wrong. I doubt she had to even pick one citizenship, as dual citizenship is legal under US law.

278 posted on 11/24/2008 7:21:20 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

bttt


279 posted on 11/24/2008 7:22:15 AM PST by petercooper (1/20/13 - Change I can believe in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: 7mmMag@LeftCoast
I find it highly insulting that if my wife and I were stationed overseas that our children born there would not have the same status as I.

That's an urban myth. A child born to American citizens overseas is an American citizen from birth and qualifies for the Presidency.

There are only two classes of American citizen- natural-born and naturalized. If you are not a naturalized citizen, then you are natural-born. There is no third category of "citizen from birth, but not natural-born."

280 posted on 11/24/2008 7:29:29 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-299 next last

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.

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