Four Supreme Court Cases Define “Natural Born Citizen”

The Post & E-Mail

Jan. 11, 2010

The Post & Email has in several articles mentioned that the Supreme Court of the United States has given the definition of what a “natural born citizen” is.  Since being a natural born citizen is an objective qualification and requirement of office for the U.S. President, it is important for all U.S. Citizens to understand what this term means.

Let’s cut through all the opinion and speculation, all the “he says,” “she says,” fluff, and go right to the irrefutable, constitutional authority on all terms and phrases mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: the Supreme Court of the United States.

First, let me note that there are 4 such cases which speak of the notion of “natural born citizenship”:

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages.  The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.   Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country.  Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)

Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina.  There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782.  Whether she was of age during this time does not appear.  If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina.  If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country.  Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her?  Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

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.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

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.

I’d like to add to these, Perkins v. Elg, the importance of which is that it actually gives examples of what a “natural born citizen” of the U.S. is; what a “citizen” of the U.S. is; and what a “native born citizen” of the U. S. is.

In this case, the U. S. Supreme Court found that a “natural born citizen” is a person who is born of two U.S. citizen parents AND born in the mainland of U.S.

Finally it should be noted, that to define a term is to indicate the category or class of things which it signifies.  In this sense, the Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof.”

Hence every U.S. Citizen must accept this definition or categorical designation, and fulfill his constitutional duties accordingly.  No member of Congress, no judge of the Federal Judiciary, no elected or appointed official in Federal or State government has the right to use any other definition; and if he does, he is acting unlawfully.

This chart clearly demonstrates the requirements for each class of American citizenship.

Permalink . . .

Source:

Patriots?

The Obama Files

Some picture, huh?  The look on both of their faces speaks volumes — but isn’t it supposed to be the right hand over your heart?

This image could have been flipped in a graphics tool, but notice, both of them have rings on their ring finger — their left hand.  His suit coat is buttoned correctly, and the flag pin is on his left lapel –so it is not a mirror image.

Other photos of Michelle shows she parts her hair on the right side, and you can see her watch tan line — also indicating left hand.

We know that Obama frequently uses hand signals to express himself.

Are both of them as dumb as they appear?  I doubt it.  This is purposeful, and obviously pre-planned.  They both know the correct salute, so one must ask, what message are the Obamas sending?  And who are they sending it to?

Source:

Our Founders Stopped Socialism – You Can Too

Family Security Matters

Dick McDonald

On Election Night 2008, a deliriously happy Peggy Joseph breathlessly told the press, “I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car,” “I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage” and “This is the most memorable day in my life.”

We don’t know how it worked out for Peggy but for far too many Americans on both ends of the economic ladder their economic prospects look tragically worse today than that day in November 2008 when Peggy Joseph celebrated her good fortune. Of course, it would be an easy thing to blame our current difficulties on our new President, but he is only perpetuating a disease that had been infecting the body politic for decades.

Societies that allow government to redistribute property and grant so many free entitlements to their citizens eventually run out of the money to afford them. And so it is in America. Politicians have incurred debts that now total over a million dollars for each and every household in the country – folks, our government is technically “bankrupt.”

Complete Story:

Hillary was right, Obama fails the 3AM Phone Call

New York Post

WASHINGTON — Turns out Hillary Rodham Clinton was right all along.

During the nastiest battle of the entire 2008 presidential race, she aired an alarming television commercial warning voters that they would come to regret nominating Barack Obama to occupy the White House.

If — in a national security crisis — the “red phone” rang at 3 a.m., the ad intoned, Obama would not hear it.

Or he would fail to answer it.

Or he would be on vacation.

In any case, an Obama White House would so diminish the threat of terrorism that the government’s focus would shift away from the harsh and determined tactics used to protect the homeland.

Getty Images

see more videos

Instead, Obama would turn his attention to becoming more popular in the world and stress negotiations over hardball tactics.

This attitude from the commander in chief would trickle down to every corner of the federal government responsible for national security.

Obama lashed out at Clinton, dismissing her and accusing her of desperation and playing upon people’s fears.

“Sen. Obama says that if we talk about national security in this campaign, we’re trying to scare people,” replied Clinton, appropriately mystified.

Well, yesterday those chickens came home to roost.

On a day when the administration desperately hoped to calm America’s fears that a soft-headed, bumbling raft of politically correct peaceniks had taken over and fallen asleep at the national security switch, there wasn’t much to see in the White House other than bungling of previous bungles.

These guys could not even settle on a time for Obama to address the country without rescheduling four times.

When he finally did speak — in the late afternoon — Obama offered a crushing analysis.

Evaluating all the ways in which his administration failed leading up to the attempted crotch-bombing of a US airliner on Christmas Day, Obama declared it a “systemic failure.”

Yes, indeed.

Far more terrifying was how basic and fundamental these breakdowns were.

In the future, Obama said, “we must follow the leads that we get.”

You think?

“We can’t sit on information that could protect the American people.”

Seriously?

“We must do better in keeping dangerous people off of airplanes.”

You don’t say!

Is anyone else feeling a little less than reassured right about now?

Not that any of this should have come as much of a surprise.

It is certainly not the first piece of evidence that Obama would rather be liked in the world than pursue the tactics proven to beat this evil and unceasing enemy.

Never will be forgotten Obama’s trip to Cairo last year to address the Muslim world, when he said that he believes it is “part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

Forget for a moment that such folly appears nowhere in the American president’s job description.

If you have time for such nonsense, then you are not spending enough time thinking about how to thwart this enemy.

But it is not like we weren’t warned by Hillary Clinton.

There was, however, a glint of good news yesterday. Obama invited former President Bill Clinton into the White House for an unexpected private chat.

Let’s hope Obama asked him where the red phone is and how to answer it.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/hillary_was_right_fails_the_phone_OOkY1azIMVGzykoVWCCozM#ixzz0cJG7zuIa

Obama Aids the Enemy He Will Not Name

American Thinker

By Pamela Geller

White House National Security Adviser James Jones warned that Americans would feel “a certain shock” after reading the report on the Islamic jihadist who hid bombs in his crotch and tried to blow up Northwest Flight 253 in Detroit on Christmas Day.

Well, I was shocked.

The loudest (deafening, actually) part of Obama’s remarks Thursday on the war on the West is what he didn’t say. Not once in Obama’s self-aggrandizing speech on the Muslim Christmas bomber did he ever mention jihad or Islam.

And that is whom we are at war with.

To say that al-Qaeda alone is the enemy is just more obfuscation and deception. It’s bureaucratic boilerplate.

Imagine, if you will, during, say, World War II, if the Axis press accounts of Allied military operations refused to use the word America or United States.

For example, a D-Day report would go like this: On June 6, 1944, nearly 160,000 Iowans, New Yorkers, Jerseyans, Alaskans, Texans, and some black and white folks landed along a 50-mile stretch of heavily-fortified sandy coastline to fight Nazi Germany on the beaches of Normandy, France. More than 5,000 ships and 13,000 aircraft filled with all kinds of people supported the D-Day invasion, and by day’s end, Floridians had gained a foothold in Normandy.

Obama would speak only about “al-Qaeda.”

Al-Qaeda is a manifestation of devout Islam. Just as Hamas, Hezb’allah, al-Muhajiroun, The Armed Islamic Group, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, MILF, CAIR, ISNA, Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, the Armed Islamic Group of Algeria…

It is Islam.

And by refusing to name the enemy, Obama has perpetrated yet another devastating attack on American security.

He is by far the most secretive and opaque president we have ever had the bad judgment to elect. While Obama and his gang of thieves hide behind closed doors to pass secret health care legislation that will enslave Americans under the Stalin-like propaganda chimera of “reform,” he has opened to our mortal enemies a veritable treasure trove of intelligence.

On December 29, and very much under the radar, (he was sunnin’ and funnin’ in Hawaii at the time), Obama declassified just about everything he possibly could. All of it will help foreign governments and Obama’s Communist-Socialist associates in the U.S. This executive order is a tsunami info-dump of newly declassified data — material that was classified before June 29, 1985. It is all about to be made public — despite the danger this poses to U.S. national security — 180 days from the signing of the Executive Order.

The age of the documents doesn’t automatically diminish the national security risk. Many of the individuals and organizations this material will cover are still very much with us. And Obama’s new regulations also make it tougher to classify documents. “When determining to originally classify information, if there is significant doubt about the need to classify the information, it shall not be classified.” Why not err on the side of caution, especially in a time of war?

The new rules stipulate that “information in permanently historically valuable records exempted from automatic declassification at 25 years must be declassified at 50 years unless it concerns: a confidential human source, a human intelligence source, or key design concepts of weapons of mass destruction.” Reassured? Don’t be. The definition of “weapons of mass destruction” has also been changed so as to allow for the declassification of more documents.

Obama will also establish a new National Declassification Center (NDC), whose job will be to “streamline declassification processes. …The President has committed the NDC to process over 400 million records by 2013 and so this center will be very large scale in nature.”

Worst of all, the new regulations specifically describe processes by which “classified information originating in one agency may be disseminated by any other agency to which it has been made available” to foreign governments.

Imagine: We can’t see health care legislation, but our enemies can see…everything from twenty-five years ago.

This breach of national security is a treacherous act, a gift to our enemies, and fodder for a propaganda press.

Imagine such an action in a time of war.

But since Obama won’t even say who we’re at war against, it isn’t surprising.

Source:

Red Flags Overlooked

HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ACTIVELY COVERING FOR OBAMA’S CHANGED VITAL RECORD

The Post & E-mail

by Nellie Esquire

(Jan. 10, 2010) — People are asking how so many terrorist red flags could be overlooked by so many.  The answer is, that they have been overlooked the same way these “birther” red flags were not only overlooked, but ridiculed.

Some examples of these “Birther” red flags can be culled from the public behavior of the Hawaii Department of Health and the Hawaii Office for Information Practices, in response to public inquiry regarding Obama’s vital records, which are an essential documentary issue in establishing his citizenship status, and whether he meets the qualifications of the office of U.S. President, which not only requires that one be a U.S. Citizen, but also a natural born citizen.

Let’s list just a few cases in point.

Complete Story:

Let’s not Forget: Bill Clinton was the first “Birther”

ON GOOD MORNING AMERICA, AUGUST 4TH, 2008, QUESTIONED OBAMA’S ELIGIBILITY

The Post & E-Mail

by John Charlton

(Jan. 11, 2010) — Let’s not forget that the first “Birther” of note, was Bill Clinton.  “Birther” is the derogatory appellation used by Obama supporters to ridicule those who ask why Obama won’t show his birth certificate.

Late last night, The Post & Email published the results of recent investigation of the issue, by a citizen journalist, which explain that the Hawaii Department of Health knows Obama’s alleged birth certificate (displayed on the Internet as an electronic image of a Certification of Live Birth) is a forgery.

In this context, it should be noted that Bill Clinton was apparently aware of the forgery as early as Obama’s birthday in 2008.

Complete Story:

Obama Threatens War-like Actions Against Israel

Atlas Shrugs

The latest O-ttack on the Jews comes in the wat of threats and sanctions against Israel. Obama’s hatchet man in the Middle East, the profound failure, George Mitchell.

US President Barack Obama’s special Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, threatened late last week to withhold financial aid to Israel if the Jewish state does not accept demanded concessions to Islam.

I pray that Israel tells Obama to take his loan guarantees and shove them up his ass.

JCH opined, “Having George Mitchell working on this situation is a farce and a disgrace. He was orphaned at a young age and adopted by Lebanese parents. He was raised in an Arab household. I’m sure he learned a lot of helpful things about Jews and Israel there. He is completely unfit for this job. But in that respect, he fits in well with the rest of the Obama crowd.”

Mitchell  proposed that sanctions be considered against Israel, including foreign aid and other support provided by the United States, as a potential solution  (ah, yes, a final solution) to help him make some progress in the on-going Middle-East negotiations.

So let.s understand this. Iran can build a nuclear arsenal fit to blow up the world, they can slaughter their own Muslim (and non-Muslim) populations with impunity, they can threaten to wipe non-Muslim countries off the map,  but Israel cannot be sovereign. Israel will be punished for not submitting to Islam and surrendering to Islamic anti-semitism.

President Obama’s end-of-the-year deadline for the mad mullahs to make a deal on uranium enrichment came and went, but not without incident. There were three, none good. Most troubling, the White House proved it still doesn’t have a Plan B, even though its unBush diplomacy has proven to be a total dud. Get a load of the double-talk from press secretary Robert Gibbs.

Asked at a briefing what the US will do now, Gibbs did a good imitation of comic Professor Irwin Corey, without the laughs. “Well, the next step is ongoing, and that is working with our partners in the P5+1 and throughout the international community in looking at the next steps to hold Iran accountable.”

Complete Story:

Pres Orders Team to Pursue Terror Leads: We Weren’t Already?

Jan. 10, 2010

In a revealing admission, President Barack Obama said today he was directing U.S. intelligence agencies to begin to do something many had assumed they were already doing: “[A]ssigning specific responsibility for investigating all leads on high priority threats so that these leads are pursued and acted upon aggressively.”

“That is a shock because we had such a follow-up system when I was there,” said Richard Clarke, the White House counter-terrorism director in the Clinton and Bush administrations. Clarke, who worked on the Obama transition team, is now an ABC News consultant.

The President said he would hold his staff accountable but said no one person was responsible or would be fired. “Ultimately the buck stops with me,” the President said.

In announcing his review of the failures that allowed a “known terrorist” to board a flight to Detroit with a bomb on Christmas Day, the President said there was “a failure to connect the dots of intelligence that existed across our intelligence community.”

The review found that “no single component of the counter-terrorism community assumed responsibility for the threat reporting and followed it through.”

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was apprehended on Christmas after allegedly attempting to detonate explosives sewn into his underwear on a Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit. After the incident, Abdulmutallab’s father revealed that he had contacted U.S. officials in Nigeria and warned them that his 23-year-old son had extreme views and might pose a threat to the U.S.

Source:

Barack Obama Nationality Scandal

Independent News

There have been rumbles of unrest around the world regarding Obama’s nationality since the day he stated he would run for the presidency.  Now, after more than a year as president of the USA, the rumbles have turned into a full on eruption.

The Barack Obama nationality scandal is refusing to burn itself out and seems to be gathering even more speed with Congressman Nathan Deal questioning the eligibility of Obama to hold the presidency.  This is the first time in history that a serving president has been questioned about eligibility by a member of congress.

Over the last week the internet has been reporting this story with the blogosphere almost going into meltdown over the latest developments yet no mainstream media seem interested in the story that just won’t go away for Obama.

Congressman Deal asked the president to prove that he is legally entitled to hold the presidency electronically on December 1st 2009.  This communication was confirmed received by Obama’s staff but has yet to be responded to.

Even though the president has already produced his short-form birth certificate in order to stop these questions, he has spent a large amount of taxpayers money (estimated to be more than two million dollars) ensuring that the long-form certificate is kept from the public – an action that has raised more than a few eyebrows along the way.

Throughout the campaign trail and longer, Obama made promises of the most transparent administration than any other so why the need to hide a simple birth certificate?  Many claim that the whole situation is a complete waste of time and distracting but supporters of the question refuse to stop asking more and more questions.

It seems that the original question seems to have caused a stir not just in America but worldwide with thousands of people doing independent research in an attempt to get the facts out.  The problem with independent research is that it is hard to verify where the alleged facts came from and when they are traced back its not unusual to find that it stemmed from opinion.

With several birth certificates doing the rounds,  many proven as hoaxes, the ‘official’ birth certificate in the Obama nationality scandal seems to prove that the president was in fact a British Subject at birth.  On the website dedicated to protecting Obama from smears, Fight The Smears, there is an electronic copy of the birth certificate showing that Obama was born a British Subject.  This in itself has been the cause for much speculation on how, why and when nationality was transferred.

Obama’s nationality scandal doesn’t seem to be going anywhere at the moment and even the secret service seem to be taking an interest in anyone questioning Obama’s nationality with visits being made for security reasons.  Reported last week at Mother Jones, more and more people who have raised issue are being visited by the secret service and being left feeling very intimidated.

No matter what side of the fence you sit on this scandal seems set to stay around for a long time to come.

Source: