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.
“For two centuries we have affirmed that the domestic law of the United States recognizes the law of nations” Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 US 692 - Supreme Court 2004
George Washington: “Prosecute all crimes against the Law of Nations”
For those of you who wish to actually read the cited Supreme Court case:
"Law of nations' is another way of saying 'common law', or law made by judges in the absence of applicable legislation (legislating from the bench!!). So, if a person is calling for recognizing the 'law of nations', that person is saying that it is perfectly fine for judges to 'make law' from the bench; and that we, the US, must follow such 'judge made' law from other countries.
In this Supreme Court decision Justice Souter makes it clear that, for one, there is no Federal common law, and the Court was very hesitant to look to any foreign common law (adding that in such cases, a judge could 'pick and chose' among foreign nations); and that the case before them (involving the kidnapping of a Mexican National, by another Mexican National, in Mexico, in order to bring him back to the USA for trial), did not invoke any law of nations.
It is a lengthy decision, but good of useful information.
"When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children."
factCheck.org
You realize that English law doesn't determine U.S. citizenship, don't you?
James Buchanan, Chester Arthur, Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Hoover all had one parent who was of foreign descent. All served as President.
So we know there has been precedence for a President that did not have two citizens for parents, none of which were deposed for not being "Natural Born Citizens". So give up the argument, history says you're wrong
Will this thread have 3,493 posts like the original Eligibility Thread had, pretty much
the same members posting the same tired old stuff over and over and over again,
nothing but a circle jerk....
"A $5,000 reward for the original edition of either the Aug. 13, 1961 edition of The Honolulu Advertiser or the Aug. 14, 1961 edition of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin."
"Those are the two newspapers in which the birth announcements of Barack Obama purportedly appeared."
Seems a concerned citizen put up the funds. For me it does not matter where Obama was born..Kenya or Hawaii he can never be a natural born citizen based on the foreign citizenship of his father and Obama does not meet the subject to jurisdiction clause in the 14th Amendment.
Does anyone find it strange that in all the Obama lawsuits over his lack of eligibility not at one time has he presented any of his alleged birth certificates to a court?
It would be so easy to make a legal determination if they were valid. But he has not done so...why? This is very very odd Obama wants to keep his alleged birth certificates out of the courts.
What is he hiding?
lol, you are looking at every lawsuit in every court against Obama re: this dead issue....
have fun. Any idiot can initiate a suit in court. Doesn't meant it's valid.
let me know when you get back to Queen's Bench law statutes they teach in contracts, thats fun stuff for academics
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.