tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8110639002933228971.post4531435529976738312..comments2024-03-26T05:12:36.612-04:00Comments on SCOV Law: Is that Bruce Springsteen Song Enough?Daniel Richardsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14370460563783593796noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8110639002933228971.post-11431730576126972942014-04-18T18:12:49.547-04:002014-04-18T18:12:49.547-04:00Thanks for the comments; your point is well taken....Thanks for the comments; your point is well taken. Just to be clear, the "I guess we'll never know" was said tongue-planted-firmly-in cheek. Andrew Delaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05225096327264217866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8110639002933228971.post-28384936652240920802014-04-18T16:00:08.031-04:002014-04-18T16:00:08.031-04:00Continuing:
Here are SOME of the rulings:
Anke...Continuing:<br /><br /><br />Here are SOME of the rulings:<br /><br /><br />Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling: “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.”<br /><br />Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012) ruling: “It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”<br /><br />Purpura v. Obama (New Jersey 2012) ruling: “No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.”<br /><br />Voeltz v. Obama (Florida 2012) ruling: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion. [The judge cites Hollander and Ankeny]<br /><br />Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling: “Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co. , 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise”<br /><br />Farrar (et al.) v. Obama (Georgia 2012) ruling: “In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court”) addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court. [Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). … The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. … This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.”<br /><br />And, on October 1, 2012, the US Supreme Court turned down two birther appeals of the last of the Georgia ruling, Farrar, which had ruled that "children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents." By rejecting the appeal, the US Supreme Court allowed the ruling of the lower court---and the other NINE courts---to STAND.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8110639002933228971.post-45131908098418962692014-04-18T15:59:08.992-04:002014-04-18T15:59:08.992-04:00The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the...The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth, and as you have noted Obama's birth in Hawaii has been confirmed overwhelmingly. <br /><br />“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)--Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).<br /><br /><br />“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]<br /><br />"Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning."---The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)<br /><br />"Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”---Senator Lindsay Graham (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)<br /><br />And so far TEN appeals courts have all ruled on the matter of Obama's presidential eligibility and every single one of them said that the US Supreme Court had already ruled on the definition of Natural Born Citizen in the Wong Ki Ark case (which BTW was AFTER Minor v. Happersett, which does not say what birthers think in any case), and the ten appeals courts all said that the Wong Kim Ark ruling said that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law (as does the Heritage Foundation) and that it includes EVERY child born on US soil except for the children of foreign diplomats and enemy invaders.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com