The Birthers Went Down to Georgia

 

The  birthers went down to Georgia, lookin’ for an election to  spoil….

 

Last  November, Georgia citizen David Weldon filed a challenge over Obama’s qualifications to appear on Georgia’s  2012 presidential ballot.  Yesterday, Obama’s motion to dismiss Weldon’s  challenge was denied by Judge Michael Malihi of Georgia‘s Office of State Administrative Hearings.  The  hearing is scheduled for January 26.

 

The Liberty Legal Foundation,  headed by Constitutional attorney Van Irion, assisted Weldon and prepared the opposition for the  motion to dismiss.

 

Although  the mainstream media pejoratively label those who question Obama’s eligibility  as conspiratorial “birthers” and defines “birtherism” as belief in a Kenyan  birthplace, Weldon’s case stipulates otherwise, as stated in the motion:

 

The  matter before this Court has nothing to do with the birth place of the  Defendant, nor does it assert that he is not a citizen of the United States. In  fact, limited to this challenged primary election, the Plaintiff will stipulate  that the Defendant was born in Hawaii, that the Defendant is a U.S. Citizen, and  that the Defendant was Constitutionally-qualified to serve as a U.S. Senator.  The Plaintiff makes no assertion regarding the Defendant’s passports, or social security number, or any other fact  related to the Defendant, other than the one fact asserted at the beginning of  this opposition: that the Defendant’s father was not a U.S.  citizen.

Contrary  to the Defendant’s assertions, the issue presented by the Plaintiff is grounded  on one uncontestable fact, and one clear definition from the U.S. Supreme Court.  See Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167  (1875).

 

Obama  admitted, on his 2008 campaign website, that he was born a dual citizen, the son of a  non-US citizen father who was here in the country legally but temporarily on a  student visa, with the stated intention to return to his native Kenya to work in  its government.  Obama’s dual citizenship was further confirmed by the State Department and Factcheck, although Factcheck dismissed it as irrelevant based  on the opinion of an anonymous blogger.

 

 

 

In  case you’re not convinced by an anonymous blogger, other legal experts besides  Van Irion, publicly and not anonymously, assert that the statements in the  famous 1875 women’s suffrage case of Minor v Happersett are binding precedent, such as Attorneys Leo Donofrio and Mario Apuzzo, and Dr. Herb Titus.

 

In Minor, Justice Waite, writing the majority opinion, first addressed the  claim of Virginia Minor’s citizenship, and then proceeded to discuss whether  such citizenship entitled her to the right to  vote.  In answer to the first issue, (and thus making this part of  the opinion a direct holding and not dicta), Justice Waite wrote:

 

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.

 

The  two-step process followed by the court in Minor was discussed in the American Thinker article, “Citizenship Jeopardy.” The “presumed” citizenship of Hamdi and Obama’s  recent drone target, al-Awlaki was analyzed — “presumed” being the adjective  used by Justice Scalia in his dissent in Hamdi v Rumsfeld, a 2005 case  that argued Hamdi, as a US citizen by virtue of the “birthright citizenship”  practice (born in the US to non-US citizens), was entitled to habeas  corpus.

 

Popular  thinking attributes “natural born citizenship” to anyone with a US birth  certificate, and since the controversies over birthright citizenship, “anchor babies,” and “birth tourism” center on the citizenship and domicile status of  the parents, they are thus inextricably related to the definition of natural  born citizenship as it pertains to Obama.

 

 

 

 

 

Although  it appears highly unlikely that questions of Obama’s eligibility will prevent  him from running in 2012, those who care more about respect for the Constitution  than popularity should pay very close attention to this issue.  When the  need for immigration reform reaches an unavoidable peak, an examination of the  definition of citizenship in this country will be of paramount  importance.

 

 

 

Whatever one’s opinions on the constitutional definition of the term “natural  born” and its implications in the 2012 election, discussion of the meaning of  citizenship is long overdue. A large and growing population with dual  citizenship may have national security consequences.