Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We do, but we are increasingly sure that you do not. At minimum, you are capable of completely disregarding any opinion (legal or otherwise) that does not further your seditious agenda.
Obama is not a citizen based on several Supreme Court decisions. Obama fails the subject to jurisdiction in the 14th Amendment. This definition was defined in Wong Kim Ark.
Both parents must have permanent residency and domicile at the birth of the child. Obama fails this definition. His father was a transient alien student who was deported. He was never domiciled. He was never a permanent resident.
We are amazed how Obama supporters fail to understand this definition by the Supreme Court.
It is us who defend the Constitution. Obama supporters want to trash the Constitution.
I fail to understand why mr. obama's supporters cannot read and understand Wong Kim Ark was affirmed a citizen because he was born in the US to parents who established a permanent domicile.
Why they fail to understand Obama if he was born in the US...both his parents never established a permanent domicile.
Why do they purposely disregard the law to support mr. obama? This is troubling and very dangerous to our nations survival.
i don't. you are claiming that my views are disregarding the law when they are consistent with over 99.9997% of the legal community ( and that's not an inflated figure ).
honey, your misconception on Kim is gross misunderstanding what they were faced with resolving. In Kim the court only needed to resolve the issues of that case based on Kim's legal status. Any rulings on what a natural born citizens is relate ONLY to the circumstances of Kim, the court did NOT need to resolve each and every aspect of the broader issue. Appellate Courts only answer questions posed to them, the fact pattern of your Obama fantasies were not before the Kim court.
FYI:
ANY baby born on US soil is a natural born citizen unless they are a diplomats kid or the kid of a foreign invader. (as in Anchor Babies)
ANY baby born on foreign soil to a US citizen is a natural born citizen (as in McCain and Mitt's daddy)
Obama is the Prez and you or Orly have no leg to stand on.
time to MOVE ON, you are an Army of one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DraggingCanoe
I fail to understand why mr. obama's supporters cannot read and understand Wong Kim Ark was affirmed a citizen because he was born in the US to parents who established a permanent domicile.
Why they fail to understand Obama if he was born in the US...both his parents never established a permanent domicile.
Why do they purposely disregard the law to support mr. obama? This is troubling and very dangerous to our nations survival.
Where does it say...a child born to alien parents is a natural born citizen or a citizen and an alien.
here. Seems that you can't read either:
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
Quote:
I asked a natural born citizen. You do realize don't ya...a subject and a citizen are not the same.
Actually they are in US history. Just ask Jefferson when he wrote the Declaration of Independence.
Quote:
Again..where does the Supreme Court define the child of an alien and a citizen is a natural born citizen or the child of two alien parents is a natural born citizen.
You do understand English?
Its apparent you don't understand it, but can barely speak it
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
Actually they are in US history. Just ask Jefferson when he wrote the Declaration of Independence.
Its apparent you don't understand it, but can barely speak it
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
alien parents was a natural-born subject
Actually they are in US history. Just ask Jefferson when he wrote the Declaration of Independence.
Its apparent you don't understand it, but can barely speak it
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
The Constitution does not have the term natural-born subject. Wong Kim Ark was not affirmed a natural born subject.
The president needs to be a natural born citizen.
Americans are not subjects.
You have not shown anywhere..a natural born citizen is born to a us citizen and an alien.
"'British subject' means any person who owes permanent allegiance to the Crown
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
