Showing posts with label BO eligibility. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BO eligibility. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Another Discussion of Citizenship
> Subject: Obama eligibility "natural born citizen"
> ------
> Natural Born Citizen
>
> Their has been many allegations with regard to our present president of these
> United States has to where he was born. They have been called "Birthers".
> They have questions about the birth certificate and social security number or
> numbers. Are they real or valid? There are many questions, investigations and
> opinions by experts on the subject.
> The impact of a determination that Barack Obama was not born in this country
> would be profound. Every act, every appointment he has made in every
> department, every bill he has signed into law, including spending bills,
> every executive order, any proclamations would all become null and void. For
> this very reason the evidence needed, the proof provided would have to be so
> iron clad, slam dunk, spot on and overwhelming that it would be easier to
> convict Casey Anthony of her daughter's Caylee's death. Unless we had a
> confession.
> But what if we had court rulings and not just court rulings but federal court
> rulings and not just any federal court rulings but supreme court rulings
> along with a confession that makes Barack Obama ineligible to run for and be
> elected president of the United States. That this was known and that the
> knowledge was censored, hidden, along with attempts to scrub this information
> from the public to access. Would these actions be treasonous and those who
> perpetrated these action traitors.
> We all know that Barack's farther was not born in this country because
> Barack has said as much, many times. That is the confession. Below is article
> 2 of the U.S. constitution.
>
> Article. II.
> Section. 1.
>
> The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
> America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and,
> together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as
> follows:
>
> Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may
> direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and
> Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no
> Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit
> under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
>
> The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for
> two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same
> State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted
> for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and
> certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United
> States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate
> shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all
> the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the
> greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority
> of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who
> have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of
> Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President;
> and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the
> said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the
> President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each
> State having one Vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a Member or
> Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall
> be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President,
> the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the
> Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes,
> the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.
> This paragraph was changed with AMENDMENT XII
> Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.
>
> The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on
> which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the
> United States.
>
> No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States,
> at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the
> Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who
> shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen
> Years a Resident within the United States.
>
> In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death,
> Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said
> Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by
> Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of
> the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as
> President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be
> removed, or a President shall be elected.
> This paragraph was changed with AMENDMENT XXV
> Passed by Congress July 6, 1965. Ratified February 10, 1967.
>
> The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a
> Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the
> Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within
> that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
>
> Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following
> Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully
> execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of
> my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
> States."
>
> Eligibility to run and be elected President of the United States is contained
> in the fourth paragraph that has not been amended, it states a follows;
> No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States,
> at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the
> Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who
> shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen
> Years a Resident within the United States.
>
> Question; What is or who is a natural born citizen? The constitution
> doesn't say, but the federal supreme court did, and affirmed that decision
> many times afterward by siting that ruling in other decisions. Setting a long
> precedent or stare decisis a Latin maxim Stare decisis et non quieta movere:
> "to stand by decisions and not disturb the undisturbed." This is understood
> to mean that courts should generally abide by precedents and not disturb
> settled matters.. The ruling that determined what a natural born citizen is,
> by the supreme court and every other ruling of the court where that ruling
> was sited is what some if not many have attempted to censor, hide and scrub
> from public access.
>
> U.S. Supreme Court
> MINOR v. HAPPERSETT, 88 U.S. 162 (1874)
>
> 88 U.S. 162 (Wall.)
>
> MINOR
> v.
> HAPPERSETT.
>
> October Term, 1874
>
> This is the case where the federal supreme court determined what constitutes
> a natural born citizen and a naturalized citizen. It case involves a woman in
> the State of Missouri being denied the right to register to vote as a citizen
> of that State because she was a woman. Supreme Court of Missouri upheld that
> decision so it was then petitioned to the federal supreme court. The court
> took the case because of this part of the argument;
>
> "Mr. Francis Minor (with whom were Messrs. J. M. Krum and J. B. Henderson),
> for the plaintiff in error, went into an elaborate argument, partially based
> on what he deemed true political views, and partially resting on legal and
> constitutional grounds. These last seemed to be thus resolvable:
>
> 1st. As a citizen of the United States, the plaintiff was entitled to any and
> all the 'privileges and immunities' that belong to such position however
> defined; and as are held, exercised, and enjoyed by other citizens of the
> United States."
>
> As part of the opinion given by the chief justice of the court is this, in
> quotation marks as those in quotes above.
>
> "The question is presented in this case, whether, since the adoption of the
> fourteenth amendment, a woman, who is a citizen of the United States and of
> the State of Missouri, is a voter in that State, notwithstanding the
> provision of the constitution and laws of the State, which confine the right
> of suffrage to men alone. We might, perhaps, decide the case upon other
> grounds, but this question is fairly made. From the opinion we find that it
> was the only one decided in the court below, and it is the only one which has
> been argued here. The case was undoubtedly brought to this court for the sole
> purpose of having that question decided by us, and in view of the evident
> propriety there is of having it settled, so far as it can be by such a
> decision, we have concluded to waive all other considerations and proceed at
> once to its determination.
>
> It is contended that the provisions of the constitution and laws of the State
> of Missouri which confine the right of suffrage and registration therefor to
> men, are in violation of the Constitution of the United States, and therefore
> void. The argument is, that as a woman, born or naturalized in the United
> States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, is a citizen of the United
> States and of the State in which she resides, she has the right of suffrage
> as one of the privileges and immunities of her citizenship, which the State
> cannot by its laws or constitution abridge.
>
> There is no doubt that women may be citizens. They are persons, and by the
> fourteenth amendment 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States
> and subject to the jurisdiction thereof' are expressly declared to be
> 'citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' But, in
> our opinion, it did not need this amendment to give them that position.
> Before its adoption the Constitution of the United States did not in terms
> prescribe who should be citizens of the United States or of the several
> States, yet there were necessarily such citizens without such provision.
> There cannot be a nation without a people. The very idea of a political
> community, such as a nation is, implies an [88 U.S. 162, 166] association of
> persons for the promotion of their general welfare. Each one of the persons
> associated becomes a member of the nation formed by the association. He owes
> it allegiance and is entitled to its protection. Allegiance and protection
> are, in this connection, reciprocal obligations. The one is a compensation
> for the other; allegiance for protection and protection for allegiance."
>
> "For convenience it has been found necessary to give a name to this
> membership. The object is to designate by a title the person and the relation
> he bears to the nation. For this purpose the words 'subject,' 'inhabitant,'
> and 'citizen' have been used, and the choice between them is sometimes made
> to depend upon the form of the government. Citizen is now more commonly
> employed, however, and as it has been considered better suited to the
> description of one living under a republican government, it was adopted by
> nearly all of the States upon their separation from Great Britain, and was
> afterwards adopted in the Articles of Confederation and in the Constitution
> of the United States. When used in this sense it is understood as conveying
> the idea of membership of a nation, and nothing more.
>
> To determine, then, who were citizens of the United States before the
> adoption of the amendment it is necessary to ascertain what persons
> originally associated themselves together to form the nation, and what were
> afterwards admitted to membership.
>
> Looking at the Constitution itself we find that it was ordained and
> established by 'the people of the United States,'3 and then going further
> back, we find that these were the people of the several States that had
> before dissolved the political bands which connected them with Great Britain,
> and assumed a separate and equal station among the powers of the earth,4 and
> that had by Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, in which they took
> the name of 'the United States of America,' entered into a firm league of [88
> U.S. 162, 167] friendship with each other for their common defence, the
> security of their liberties and their mutual and general welfare, binding
> themselves to assist each other against all force offered to or attack made
> upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any
> other pretence whatever. 5
>
> Whoever, then, was one of the people of either of these States when the
> Constitution of the United States was adopted, became ipso facto a citizen-a
> member of the nation created by its adoption. He was one of the persons
> associating together to form the nation, and was, consequently, one of its
> original citizens. As to this there has never been a doubt. Disputes have
> arisen as to whether or not certain persons or certain classes of persons
> were part of the people at the time, but never as to their citizenship if
> they were.
>
> Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two
> ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from
> the Constitution itself, for it provides6 that 'no person except a
> natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the
> adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,'7
> and that Congress shall have power 'to establish a uniform rule of
> naturalization.' Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by
> naturalization.
>
> 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 [88
> U.S. 162, 168] 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. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that
> all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves
> citizens. The words 'all children' are certainly as comprehensive, when used
> in this connection, as 'all persons,' and if females are included in the last
> they must be in the first. That they are included in the last is not denied.
> In fact the whole argument of the plaintiffs proceeds upon that idea.
>
> Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization Congress, as
> early as 1790, provided 'that any alien, being a free white person,' might be
> admitted as a citizen of the United States, and that the children of such
> persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under
> twenty-one years of age at the time of such naturalization, should also be
> considered citizens of the United States, and that the children of citizens
> of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits
> of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens. 8 These
> provisions thus enacted have, in substance, been retained in all the
> naturalization laws adopted since. In 1855, however, the last provision was
> somewhat extended, and all persons theretofore born or thereafter to be born
> out of the limits of the jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers
> were, or should be at the time of their birth, citizens of the United States,
> were declared to be citizens also.9
>
> As early as 1804 it was enacted by Congress that when any alien who had
> declared his intention to become a citizen in the manner provided by law died
> before he was actually naturalized, his widow and children should be
> considered as citizens of the United States, and entitled to all rights and
> privileges as such upon taking the necessary oath;10 and in 1855 it was
> further provided that any woman who might lawfully be naturalized under the
> existing laws, married, or [88 U.S. 162, 169] who should be married to a
> citizen of the United States, should be deemed and taken to be a citizen. 11
>
> From this it is apparent that from the commencement of the legislation upon
> this subject alien women and alien minors could be made citizens by
> naturalization, and we think it will not be contended that this would have
> been done if it had not been supposed that native women and native minors
> were already citizens by birth."
>
> According to this ruling and other cases siting this ruling, Barack Obama
> whose farther was not a citizen but because his mother was, he became a
> citizen by naturalization, period! As such he is not eligible to run for or
> become president of these United States.
> For more information on the courts rulings here is a link to start with.
> http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/ [1]
>
> Note; When you go to this site take time to click on the posts dated December
> 08 and January 09. Very interesting!
>
>
> [1] http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
>
> ------
>
> To view and reply to this discussion visit the following page:
>
> http://connect.freedomworks.org/user/login?destination=node%2F79901%2Fdiscussions%2F427460
>
>
> If you would like to stop recieving email updates for group activity, please
> visit the notifications page in your account settings:
> http://connect.freedomworks.org/user/login?destination=user%2F120228%2Fsettings%2Fnotifications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)