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

To: pepsionice

What is odd here, the natural born distinction applies only to the President/VP....not to House members, Senators, Judges or state Governors.”

In the letter online from Jay to Washington they were concerned about commander in chief I believe that is the distinction between the requirement for President/VP and congress.


36 posted on 03/19/2023 10:02:07 AM PDT by coalminersson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: coalminersson

FYI. This may be useful.

Shared herewith is a comment made by the author of the article being discussed here. The comment was made to commenters at his own blog named Patriot Fire at this link: https://patriot-fire.net/2023/03/06/solution-for-natural-born-citizen-requirement-for-president/


“Roger (Admin) says: March 19, 2023 at 2:34 pm

My whole point is that the there is no general standard for how the requirement should be implemented. My proposal is for states to create their own general law.

Also, that it is quite useless for non-experts to argue endlessly about this topic on the Internet. I don’t want to spend the rest of my life arguing with Internet users. I just want to make the suggestion that the states start legislating a general standard that can pass inspection by the Supreme court if it is possible to do that. It seems to me that it should be possible for states to do this.

These cases that you mention are from state courts and my guess is do not set a precedent in other states. Other states may see it differently. Neither has it been tested in the Supreme Court. Even if a state court has ruled, that doesn’t mean that the state can’t afterwards pass a law that supersedes the court ruling.

These two cases are for specific situations and do not create a general standard for who should be qualified to be President that can be applied in every state.

Ankeny v. Governor of State of Indiana

Carmon ELLIOTT, Petitioner v. Ted CRUZ, Respondent.

I am about to go on a trip, so I don’t have time to read about these two cases, closely. But my point is I shouldn’t have to. Legislatures and the courts should do the work, not me and you. Nothing is going to be resolved in this issue on the Internet. We can inform people, though, and motivate them to push their state legislators to act.”


CDR Kerchner (Ret), ProtectOurLiberty.org


56 posted on 03/19/2023 6:50:58 PM PDT by CDR Kerchner (natural born Citizen, natural law, Emer de Vattel, naturels, presidential, eligibility, kamalaharris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

To: coalminersson

FYI. This may be useful.

Shared herewith is a comment made by the author of the article being discussed here. The comment was made to commenters at his own blog named Patriot Fire at this link: https://patriot-fire.net/2023/03/06/solution-for-natural-born-citizen-requirement-for-president/


“Roger (Admin) says: March 19, 2023 at 2:34 pm

My whole point is that the there is no general standard for how the requirement should be implemented. My proposal is for states to create their own general law.

Also, that it is quite useless for non-experts to argue endlessly about this topic on the Internet. I don’t want to spend the rest of my life arguing with Internet users. I just want to make the suggestion that the states start legislating a general standard that can pass inspection by the Supreme court if it is possible to do that. It seems to me that it should be possible for states to do this.

These cases that you mention are from state courts and my guess is do not set a precedent in other states. Other states may see it differently. Neither has it been tested in the Supreme Court. Even if a state court has ruled, that doesn’t mean that the state can’t afterwards pass a law that supersedes the court ruling.

These two cases are for specific situations and do not create a general standard for who should be qualified to be President that can be applied in every state.

Ankeny v. Governor of State of Indiana

Carmon ELLIOTT, Petitioner v. Ted CRUZ, Respondent.

I am about to go on a trip, so I don’t have time to read about these two cases, closely. But my point is I shouldn’t have to. Legislatures and the courts should do the work, not me and you. Nothing is going to be resolved in this issue on the Internet. We can inform people, though, and motivate them to push their state legislators to act.”



57 posted on 03/19/2023 6:52:05 PM PDT by CDR Kerchner (natural born Citizen, natural law, Emer de Vattel, naturels, presidential, eligibility, kamalaharris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | 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