Thread: Defining Natural Born Citizen

Originally Posted by jackson33

For legal purposes, regarding individual rights in the US or for being a recognized citizen, the requirements are one thing and should be liberal, IMO. HOWEVER for being the Commander & Chief of the United STATES armed forces and President the INTENDED requirement by those that wrote the Constitution were much more concerned with foreign influence of the person.

Which is why they limited the Presidency to people who were citizens at birth, whereas members of Congress can be former immigrants. All of which still means Obama is eligible.

Those of you, that feel Obama is qualified based on Citizenship, honestly believe his political philosophy is consistent with what YOU feel was that of the founders or even the majority of American's today?

Please don't use the 2008 election as an answer, which was arguably a referendum against Bush 43 and use the policy/actions over the past four years, to judge.

The election is the only means by which we can judge, because that's what put him there. As far as the philosophy of the founders, no major party politician is espousing a philosophy that is consistent with theirs.

None of that has any bearing on his Constitutional eligibility, however.

Originally Posted by Flanders

"The newest case to be scheduled for conference before the high court is Alan Keyes and Wiley Drake v. Obama. The case was launched on the day of Obama’s inauguration in 2009 and has been advancing ever since. "

How long can Supremes avoid eligibility?
Newest challenge set for conference in days
Published: 12 hours ago
by BOB UNRUH
.

And as predicted-

In orders that the US Supreme Court published today, the Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in the case of Keyes, Alan, et al. v. Obama, President of the U. S., Et al. The attorney was Gary Kreep and Orly Taitz was involved in an earlier stage of the case.

Crash and Burn.....

and yet Birthers keep saying 'any day now'......

Pretty soon I expect the courts to start penalizing birthers for filing frivolous lawsuits.

I'm also still waiting for the Birther outrage over Romney. More and more it appears that Birthers aren't really interested in citizenship rules -- they just don't like Obama.

Originally Posted by raytri

Pretty soon I expect the courts to start penalizing birthers for filing frivolous lawsuits.

Pretty soon??? Orly Taitz has been banned from filing claims in several federal districts, and one of the most prominent graphics on her website is a donation link to help her pay off her frivolous claim fines.

It really is simple for those who can read.............

Originally Posted by ThirdTerm

Title 8 of the U.S. Code's Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

- Anyone born inside the United States

- Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe

- Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.

- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national

- Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year

- Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21

- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)

- A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Motto of the Texas Rangers:

"No man in the wrong can stand up against a fellow that’s in the right and keeps on a-comin’” Bill McDonald (1852-1918 ).

Klayman told WND today that unlike other Obama eligibility cases, this case “likely will go the distance” because of the strength of Florida law, which provides voters with the right to challenge a candidate’s eligibility.

“The judge must make a decision based on eligibility,” Klayman explained. “He can’t sidestep it as judges in other states have attempted to do.”

Florida “is our best hope to get rulings on the merits.”

Sheriff Joe challenges eligibility in Florida
Judge also wants White House to back its definition of natural-born citizen
Published: 9 hours ago
by ART MOORE

http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/sheriff-j...a/?cat_orig=us

Originally Posted by Flanders

[B]Sheriff Joe challenges eligibility in Florida
Judge also wants White House to back its definition of natural-born citizen
Published: 9 hours ago
by ART MOORE

http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/sheriff-j...a/?cat_orig=us

Birthers lol
WND lol

The truth weeps everytime WND publishes

Originally Posted by Flanders

Motto of the Texas Rangers:

"No man in the wrong can stand up against a fellow that’s in the right and keeps on a-comin’” Bill McDonald (1852-1918 ).



Sheriff Joe challenges eligibility in Florida
Judge also wants White House to back its definition of natural-born citizen
Published: 9 hours ago
by ART MOORE

http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/sheriff-j...a/?cat_orig=us

You mean like what has already happened in Georgia and Indiana? In Georgia, birthers presented all their evidence, the President's side presented absolutely nothing whatsoever, didn't respond and didn't show up to the hearings.

And what happened? Birthers lost, Obama will appear on the ballot, and the Judge declared, yet again, that Obama is eligible.

Someone please explain to me how the Florida law is any different than the Georgia law.

LOL

Originally Posted by BullsLawDan

You mean like what has already happened in Georgia and Indiana? In Georgia, birthers presented all their evidence, the President's side presented absolutely nothing whatsoever, didn't respond and didn't show up to the hearings.

And what happened? Birthers lost, Obama will appear on the ballot, and the Judge declared, yet again, that Obama is eligible.

Someone please explain to me how the Florida law is any different than the Georgia law.

LOL

Birthers are all in a twitter because they think this time they have finally found a judge who is willing to ignore the evidence and the law.....just because this judge was involved in the Florida Presidential vote controversy.

Originally Posted by SFJEFF

Birthers are all in a twitter because they think this time they have finally found a judge who is willing to ignore the evidence and the law.....just because this judge was involved in the Florida Presidential vote controversy.

They're already sowing seeds, however, for their inevitable turn on this judge. I note the WND articles are saying that he has been "typically liberal" in his past. Be prepared for the inevitable claim that he is "part of the conspiracy" when he rules against them, again.