+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 10 of 58 FirstFirst ... 6789101112131420 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 576

Thread: English Common Law Requires Jus Sanguinis as Essential for Natural Born

  1. Default

    From the CRS report:

    Those issues or “doubts” raised indictaby the Supreme Court in Happersett in 1875 were,however, answered by the Supreme Court in a later decision in 1898, inUnited States v. Wong Kim Ark , which clearly repudiated the narrow and exclusive “original-community-of-citizens”reasoning of the Court in Dred Scott based on lineage and parentage, in favor of interpreting theConstitution in light of the language and principles of the British common law from which theconcept was derived. The majority opinion of the Court clearly found, by any fair reading of itsreasoning, discussion, and holding, that every person born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction (that is, not the child of foreign diplomats or of troops in hostile occupation),regardless of the citizenship of one’s parents, is a “natural born” citizen, and that the FourteenthAmendment merelyaffirmed the common law and fundamental rule in this country that one bornon the soil of the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a “natural born” citizen:
    The real harm is to our children. As long as we remain suspicious of the wrong people, predators will continue to have free reign to abuse innocent children. If they remain free from scrutiny because everyone else is focusing on gays and lesbians, more young lives will continue to be shattered and more parents will suffer the agonizing heartache of learning that they trusted someone who destroyed their child’s future.

  2. Prosper.com, finance, financial, investing, lending, borrowing, banking, credit card, payday, borrowers, lenders, debt consolidation, Prosper, investment, personal loans, personal loan, investors, investment opportunities, debt consolidation

  3. Default

    Jack Maskell makes his partisan bias so obvious in his deliberate deception, that it must be embarrassing for anyone who needs to make-out as if it is impartial.

    Good luck with that.

    What a joke Jack is and he has been exposed for his disgusting failure to perform with integrity and professionalism.

    Give Jack the sack, he is a waste of space, he is unfit for the position of trust that he has abused.


    .
    ..."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." - Supreme Court of US - Minor v Happersett

  4. #93
    Location: No Longer a Forum Member
    Posts: 6,782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelN View Post
    Jack Maskell makes his partisan bias so obvious in his deliberate deception, that it must be embarrassing for anyone who needs to make-out as if it is impartial.
    He makes no bias evident. He instead makes his legal analysis transparent and his conclusions obvious. Those are both hallmarks of excellent scholarship.

    I know it must really make you sad, but the report is brilliant. And it crushed forever any Birther hope of cooperation by the only body Constitutionally empowered to remove a sitting President; the Congress.

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelN View Post
    Jack Maskell makes his partisan bias so obvious in his deliberate deception, that it must be embarrassing for anyone who needs to make-out as if it is impartial.

    Good luck with that.

    What a joke Jack is and he has been exposed for his disgusting failure to perform with integrity and professionalism.

    Give Jack the sack, he is a waste of space, he is unfit for the position of trust that he has abused.


    .
    I will leave the readers to decide who is the joke, who is a disgusting failure and who has an obvious partisan bias.

    Meanwhile, I will keep refering to the CRS, the Court of Appeals of Indiana, Congress, the voters, Chief Justice Roberts- you know- all of the people who understand better who is a Natural Born Citizen in the U.S. than Aussie Mike.
    The real harm is to our children. As long as we remain suspicious of the wrong people, predators will continue to have free reign to abuse innocent children. If they remain free from scrutiny because everyone else is focusing on gays and lesbians, more young lives will continue to be shattered and more parents will suffer the agonizing heartache of learning that they trusted someone who destroyed their child’s future.

  6. Default

    Here's an article that exposes the deliberate slimy deceit of Jack Maskell.

    This is only a preliminery.

    http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress....ch-propaganda/

    Yesterday, attorney Jack Maskell issued yet another version of his ever changing Congressional Research Memo on POTUS eligibility and the natural-born citizen clause. The CRS memo is actually a blessing for me in that I’ve been putting a comprehensive report together on this issue for about a month now. But not having an official source standing behind the entire body of propaganda made my job more difficult.

    The complete refutation will be available soon, but for now I will highlight one particularly deceptive example which illustrates blatant intellectual dishonesty. On pg. 48, Maskell states:

    In one case concerning the identity of a petitioner, the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”221

    221 Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920). The Supreme Court also noted there: “It is better that many Chinese immigrants should be improperly admitted than that one natural born citizen of the United States should be permanently excluded from his country.” 253 U.S. at 464.

    Reading this yesterday, I had a fleeting moment of self-doubt. Could I have missed this case? Did the Supreme Court really state that the son of two aliens was a natural-born citizen? The Twilight Zone theme suddenly chimed in. I then clicked over to the actual case, and of course, the Supreme Court said no such thing.

    The petitioner was born in California to parents who were both US citizens. His father was born in the United States and was a citizen by virtue of the holding in US v. Wong Kim Ark. His mother’ place of birth was not mentioned. Regardless, she was covered by the derivative citizenship statute, and was, therefore, a US citizen when the child was born.

    It was alleged that the petitioner had obtained a false identity and that the citizen parents were not his real parents. But the Supreme Court rejected the State’s secret evidence on this point and conducted their citizenship analysis based upon an assumption these were petitioner’s real parents.

    Having been born in the US of parents who were citizens, petitioner was indeed a natural-born citizen. But Maskell’s frightening quotation surgery makes it appear as if the petitioner was born of alien parents. The Supreme Court rejected that contention.

    And Maskell’s ruse highlights the depravity of lies being shoved down the nation’s throat on this issue. I can imagine Mini-Me sitting on his lap while this was being prepared.

    When you look carefully at Maskell’s creative use of quotation marks, you’ll see that the statement is NOT a quote from the case, but rather a Frankenstein inspired patchwork.

    He starts the reversed vivisection off with the following:

    “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son…”

    These are the first few words of a genuine quote from the Court’s opinion. Then Maskell goes way out of context for the next two body parts. The first is not in quotation marks:

    of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is

    And finally, an unrelated quote from elsewhere in the Court’s opinion:

    “a natural born American citizen ….”

    Put it all together and you get the following monstrosity:

    …the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”

    But the Supreme Court never said that. Here’s what they actually said:

    “It is not disputed that if petitioner is the son of Kwock Tuck Lee and his wife, Tom Ying Shee, he was born to them when they were permanently domiciled in the United States, is a citizen thereof, and is entitled to admission to the country. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 , 18 Sup. Ct. 456.” Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920).

    This real quote – when liberated from Maskell’s embalming fluid – does not resemble the propaganda at all.

    Maskell avoids the inconvenient truth that the Court took direct notice of the authorities having established that the petitioner’s father was born in the US and that he was a voter:

    “…the father of the boy was native born and was a voter in that community.” Id. at 460.

    Maskell never mentions that the father and mother were US citizens at the time of petitioner’s birth in California.

    This deceitful exercise alone strips the entire memo of all credibility.

    Had Maskell simply offered his arguments fairly, using real quotes instead of Frankensteining this crap, I would not have attacked him personally. But such deceptive behavior deserves no respect whatsoever. The memo is pure propaganda, and it’s not even shy about it.

    LOOMING CONSTITUTIONAL DISASTERS

    The timing of the memo’s appearance is alarming. I have been saying for quite awhile now that Obama doesn’t really have to worry about the natural-born issue coming back to haunt him in court unless he attempts to suspend the Constitution. I know that sounds paranoid. And nothing would please me more than to be wrong on that prophecy. If my fears don’t come to pass, I will gladly wear the tin foil hat of shame. But the appearance of the updated CRS memo at this particular moment portends a Constitutional disaster.

    If Obama attempts to suspend the US Constitution and/or declare martial law and/or suspend the 2012 election… chances of the natural-born citizen issue finding its way to the Supreme Court on the merits increase exponentially.

    Leo Donofrio, Esq.

    .
    ..."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." - Supreme Court of US - Minor v Happersett

  7. Default

    Count the references to "law of nations".

    Count the citations to Vattel. (Vat & Vatt)

    U.S. Supreme Court
    RESPUBLICA v. DE LONGCHAMPS, 1 U.S. 111 (1784)

    1 U.S. 111 (Dall.)

    Respublica
    v.
    De Longchamps

    Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia

    October Sessions, 1784

    http://supreme.justia.com/us/1/111/case.html

    More evidence of the influence of Vattel and the Law of Nations on the framing period and thereafter.

    Interesting video with some FACTS.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dbtOoX3exk"]The American People WAKE UP after the Library of Congress proves Obama NOT to be a US Citizen. - YouTube[/ame]


    .
    Last edited by MichaelN; Dec 09 2011 at 08:33 PM.
    ..."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." - Supreme Court of US - Minor v Happersett

  8. Default

    The voters, the electoral college, the ENTIRE congress and the ENTIRE judiciary say you're wrong. That should tell you something. Do you know what that is?

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SFJEFF View Post
    I will leave the readers to decide who is the joke, who is a disgusting failure and who has an obvious partisan bias.

    Meanwhile, I will keep refering to the CRS, the Court of Appeals of Indiana, Congress, the voters, Chief Justice Roberts- you know- all of the people who understand better who is a Natural Born Citizen in the U.S. than Aussie Mike.
    Its worth repeating. And this:

    From the CRS report:

    "Those issues or “doubts” raised indictaby the Supreme Court in Happersett in 1875 were,however, answered by the Supreme Court in a later decision in 1898, inUnited States v. Wong Kim Ark , which clearly repudiated the narrow and exclusive “original-community-of-citizens”reasoning of the Court in Dred Scott based on lineage and parentage, in favor of interpreting theConstitution in light of the language and principles of the British common law from which theconcept was derived. The majority opinion of the Court clearly found, by any fair reading of itsreasoning, discussion, and holding, that every person born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction (that is, not the child of foreign diplomats or of troops in hostile occupation),regardless of the citizenship of one’s parents, is a “natural born” citizen, and that the FourteenthAmendment merelyaffirmed the common law and fundamental rule in this country that one bornon the soil of the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a “natural born” citizen"

    Meanwhile it is always amusing to see how Birthers attack those who have the temerity to contradict Birther orthodoxies.

    The CRS memo reflects what all Americans know- which is why the Court of Appeals of Indiana said the same thing, and why Chief Justice Roberts swore in President Obama.

    Guess they taught it wrong in Australia Mike.
    The real harm is to our children. As long as we remain suspicious of the wrong people, predators will continue to have free reign to abuse innocent children. If they remain free from scrutiny because everyone else is focusing on gays and lesbians, more young lives will continue to be shattered and more parents will suffer the agonizing heartache of learning that they trusted someone who destroyed their child’s future.

  10. #99
    Location: No Longer a Forum Member
    Posts: 6,782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelN View Post
    Here's an article that exposes the deliberate slimy deceit of Jack Maskell.
    Too bad its from Leo Donofrio who so consistently errs in his understanding of the law that he is now staring down the barrel of a quarter million dollars in sanctions for one of the only two cases he has attempted in the last ten years. The other was, of course, his Birther fail in front of the Supreme Court.

    It actually exposes nothing... since Donofrio is confusing testimony offered in the case with what the decision actually said. But then again, Donofrio also thinks he is God. That is not hyperbole. He actually does think that.

    Go figure.


  11. #100
    Location: No Longer a Forum Member
    Posts: 6,782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelN View Post
    Count the references to "law of nations".
    To bad they all have to do with international law, not municipal law. They have nothing to do with US citizenship law which is municipal.

    Vattel was never once referenced favorably by a single Framer or Founder on any subject having to do with citizenship.

    Never once.

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 10 of 58 FirstFirst ... 6789101112131420 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Native Born Is Not Natural Born
    By Frogger in forum United States
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Jan 11 2012, 09:44 AM
  2. Replies: 164
    Last Post: Nov 23 2011, 05:02 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks