When every court from state,state appeals,federal,federal appeals,miltary,and The Supreme Court has done just the opposite... you should stop and think about who's really dreaming jem
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Liberals Now Calling For Obama Birth Cert
- Thread starter bugscoe
- Start date
When every court from state,state appeals,federal,federal appeals,miltary,and The Supreme Court has done just the opposite... you should stop and think about who's really dreaming jem
Quote from Range Rover:
When every court from state,state appeals,federal,federal appeals,miltary,and The Supreme Court has done just the opposite... you should stop and think about who's really dreaming jem
you are now turning into a loon.
I have already told you those cases were rejected because of lack of jurisdiction or other procedural reasons.
Obama will be the one bringing the suit not birthers.
You are starting to spin out and look desperate.
----
Quote from jem:
you are now turning into a loon.
I have already told you those cases were rejected because of lack of jurisdiction or other procedural reasons.
Obama will be the one bringing the suit not birthers.
You are starting to spin out and look desperate.
Birther lawyers are the proven loons jem.
I'm sure Col Terry Linkins attorney told him the same stuff you are saying on ET,and now Terry Linkin is sitting in prison
Phillp Berg, oily titaz,Terry Linkins atterneys,you etc.keep on hoping jem
right and when obama sues to get on the ballot, both sides will issue a subpoena and both sides will get access to the originals for the court to review.
hopefully we will get to see it too.
--
by the way wikipedia does a good job explaining that we do not know what a natural born citizen is... and that the 14th amendment does not address the issue.
here is a sample of people with problems.... including arthur and you know who...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_citizen_of_the_United_States
hopefully we will get to see it too.
--
by the way wikipedia does a good job explaining that we do not know what a natural born citizen is... and that the 14th amendment does not address the issue.
here is a sample of people with problems.... including arthur and you know who...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_citizen_of_the_United_States
Quote from jem:
right and when he sues to get on the ballot, both sides will issue a subpoena and both sides will get access to the originals for the court to review.
hopefully we will get to see it too.
--
by the way wikipedia does a good job explaining that we do not know what a natural born citizen is... and that the 14th amendment does not address the issue.
here is a sample of people with problems.... including arthur and you know who...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_citizen_of_the_United_States
I know that the constitution does not explain the definition of NBC very well,but as an attorney don't you know about precedent ? Constitutional experts also say that if you are born in the US you are a NBC .The link you provided explains that very well
O.K. Go make a list of constitutional scholars.
There are some who get my respect
Next go find their opinion on the issue of NBC and see if they say it is clear from the case law how the court will rule.
--
You are as emotional and partisan as any birther.
I am just giving you facts and issues.
I am not saying what will happen.
you need to chill out.
There are some who get my respect
Next go find their opinion on the issue of NBC and see if they say it is clear from the case law how the court will rule.
--
You are as emotional and partisan as any birther.
I am just giving you facts and issues.
I am not saying what will happen.
you need to chill out.
here is a case from the wikipedia article which explains exactly what I have been saying.
Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874): In this case decided after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Court stated (pp. 167â68):
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. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.
Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874): In this case decided after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Court stated (pp. 167â68):
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. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.
Quote from jem:
O.K. Go make a list of constitutional scholars.
There are some who get my respect
Next go find their opinion on the issue of NBC and see if they say it is clear from the case law how the court will rule.
--
You are as emotional and partisan as any birther.
I am just giving you facts and issues.
I am not saying what will happen.
you need to chill out.
You are the one getting emotional and started with the name calling jem
just in case you missed it.. an excellent example you brought up.
from wikipedia...
Chester A. Arthur (1829â1886), 21st president of the United States, was rumored to have been born in Canada.[35][36] This was never demonstrated by his Democratic opponents, although Arthur Hinman, an attorney who had investigated Arthur's family history, raised the objection during his vice-presidential campaign and after the end of his Presidency. Arthur was born in Vermont to a U.S. citizen mother and a father from Ireland, who was eventually naturalized as a U.S. citizen. Despite the fact that his parents took up residence in the United States somewhere between 1822 or 1824,[37] Chester Arthur additionally began to claim between 1870 and 1880[38] that he had been born in 1830, rather than in 1829, which only caused minor confusion and was even used in several publications.[39] Arthur was sworn in as president when President Garfield died after being shot. Since his Irish father William was naturalized 14 years after Chester Arthur's birth,[40] his citizenship status at birth is unclear, because he was born before the 1868 ratification of the 14th Amendment, which provided that any person born on United States territory and being subject to the jurisdiction thereof was considered a born U.S. citizen, and because he was a British subject at birth by patrilineal jus sanguinis.[41] Arthur's natural born citizenship status is therefore equally unclear.
from wikipedia...
Chester A. Arthur (1829â1886), 21st president of the United States, was rumored to have been born in Canada.[35][36] This was never demonstrated by his Democratic opponents, although Arthur Hinman, an attorney who had investigated Arthur's family history, raised the objection during his vice-presidential campaign and after the end of his Presidency. Arthur was born in Vermont to a U.S. citizen mother and a father from Ireland, who was eventually naturalized as a U.S. citizen. Despite the fact that his parents took up residence in the United States somewhere between 1822 or 1824,[37] Chester Arthur additionally began to claim between 1870 and 1880[38] that he had been born in 1830, rather than in 1829, which only caused minor confusion and was even used in several publications.[39] Arthur was sworn in as president when President Garfield died after being shot. Since his Irish father William was naturalized 14 years after Chester Arthur's birth,[40] his citizenship status at birth is unclear, because he was born before the 1868 ratification of the 14th Amendment, which provided that any person born on United States territory and being subject to the jurisdiction thereof was considered a born U.S. citizen, and because he was a British subject at birth by patrilineal jus sanguinis.[41] Arthur's natural born citizenship status is therefore equally unclear.