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.
The legal standard does not include any deference to some anonymous Internet guy's "satisfaction." However, you already have a powerful Constitutional remedy for your unhappiness; do not vote for him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi
Again, say you. There are legitimate reasons to question the COLB presented by Obama.
If that were true, a criminal case would have been filed by now.
The legal standard does not include any deference to some anonymous Internet guy's "satisfaction." However, you already have a powerful Constitutional remedy for your unhappiness; do not vote for him.
If that were true, a criminal case would have been filed by now.
No criminal case has been filed.
QED: That is not true.
If he has obtained office fraudulently, the powerful Constitutional remedy
appropriate to the offence is impeachment and removal from office. Then we will vote for legitimate candidates.
i'd actually like to see the COLB submitted during the hearing. plus i'd love it if any birthers are accepting bets on how the judge will rule on the minor v happersett theory of exclusive definition.
but...... at the end of the day it's only a recommendation that the judge will be passing on to the GA SOS.
It appears the Minor definition of a nbc will be presented to the court..with or without the perpetual defendant.
Wonderful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DraggingCanoe
This legal definition will exorcise the perpetual inhabitant from the Georgia ballot and the presidency. Please note my usage the word exorcise.
Just like it did in Indiana?
Quote:
Minor v. Happersett, 88 (21 Wall.) U.S. 162, 167 (1874). In Minor, written only six years after the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, the Court observed that:
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.
Id. at 167-168. Thus, the Court left open the issue of whether a person who is born within the United States of alien parents is considered a natural born citizen.12
...
Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”
Here's the way I see it. THe Hawaii state officials could have been pressured to accept a less than authentic document. I'm not saying they did or that it was. Just maybe they were.
And parts of moon still unexplored could be made of cheese. I'm not saying they are. Just maybe they are.
..., the powerful Constitutional remedy
appropriate to the offence is impeachment and removal from office. Then we will vote for legitimate candidates.
close. in that scenario biden ascends to the presidency.
There are zillions of possible scenarios the "could" have happened. I frankly don't understand why someone seeming intelligent could believe this hogwash, and that's what it is, about this furtive Kenyan birth. There is ample documetation that Obama was born in Hawaii, and NONE from reliable sources that he was born in Kenya.
Obama traveled on a Kenyan or Indonesian passport as a child. If he was an American he would of had a US passport.
The Minor definition is a legal precedent from the US Supreme Court.
Odd then that it has never been cited as precedent in any subsequent court case. Not once, in 136 years.
On the other hand, Wong Kim Ark has been cited as precedent.
Something is wrong regarding your personal relationship with reality.
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.
