Justices to mull Obama citizenship again

DOUBTS ARE NOT MANUFACTURED...these issues have been studied in historical detail unlike any issue I've ever heard of!!! What a crash course education on OUR Constitution! This is not just a Constitutional Crisis, It's an educational crisis! John A. Bingham, chief architect of the 14th Amendments first section, considered the proposed national law on citizenship as “simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…” In a nutshell, it means this: The constitution of the United States does not grant citizenship at birth to just anyone who happens to be born within American borders. It is the allegiance (complete jurisdiction) of the child’s birth parents at the time of birth that determines the child’s citizenship--not geographical location. "OF PARENTS NOT OWING ALLEGIANCE TO ANY FOREIGN SOVEREIGNTY" How could it possibly be any other way? http://www.14thamendment.us/articles/anchor_babies_unconstitutionality.html

Unless someone can prove otherwise, the Supremes are going to look at this, see a man elected by 52% of the American people in a fair election, born in Hawaii to an American mother. To overcome these suppositions, the Supremes will set a very steep burden of proof to determine whether to take this case. Speculation, unanswered questions about Obama, or his father's citizenship probably aren't going to carry the day with them on this. They'll demand much more than that. I'm willing to bet that they will look at this case, conclude that there's no compelling evidence to suggest that Obama is not natural born, and decline to take it.

He just needs to show his original birth certificate, and then it's all taken care of. Show the birth certificate.

Hard to imagine how Obama was born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. As Paul Madison (Federalist Blog) points out, naturalized citizens are equally required to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States as those born. We all know to be a naturalized citizen one has to first renounce all allegiances to other countries in advance of becoming a citizen, i.e., naturalized citizens cannot owe dual citizenship or allegiances. It's no different with citizenship through birth. Obama was born with dual citizenship.

So, the 'Hunter' (of what?) is OK with d'masses voting to ignore Constitutional issues. Now? Whaddabout Bush's Constitutional problems, equivocal about them too? Are we a nation of black-robed crows, picking over the bones of our fathers, or a nation of laws - the first being the Constitution? Prepare to be assimilated by the BOG. Resistance to Obamination is futile. BOG Brother is watching - OBEY!

I am happy to read that someone on the Supreme Court has some sense and is considering hearing the issue of Obama's proof of citizenship. It is a great risk to our country if the Supreme Court does not hear the case. If Obama is enjoying dual citizenship in both the U.S. and Britain, then he cannot be President of the United States. I do not want to be under British rule and if he was born in Kenya that country was British ruled at that time. They can tell him to do anything and he by loyalty would have to do it. Those who argue that even if his mother is a citizen, then that gives him the right to be a citizen are wrong. The case is not about Citizenship by Lineage (jus sanguinis - right of blood), but it is about (Jus Soli - place of birth). So please let us Americans not take a chance and become deceived to not make Obama show his real official birth certificate and Prove he is a citizen. It will only cost $12 for him to obtain a real copy of it. He should already have a copy from all the colleges he has attended and getting driver's license in Illinois. You must show a birth certificate or other proof of birth. The birth certificate Obama put on his website is not a valid Hawaii birth certificate. Therefore, he just needs to prove it!

If he is the anti Christ, can he possibly be stopped? He should show the birth certificate that proves he is legitimate and if he could, HE WOULD!

But no matter what spin they take he is a natural born US citizen. 1. If he were born in Kenya - his mother is a US citizen and he would still be a natural born citizen. Although his mother was 18 when he was born (the law regarding the time the US parent had to live in the US changed from 5 years after age 14 years to 2 years after age 14 years and this law was reoctractive to the 1930's). So he would still be a natural born citizen. 2. If he was adopted in Indonesia - he was a minor and cannot give up his citizenship and his parents cannot give up his citizenship - so he is still a natural born citizen. 3. Because his father was a British Citizen at the time - he would have dual citizenship. But having dual citizenship does not mean that he surrendered his US citizenship. A court case regarding dual citizenship resulting in the precedence that a dual citizenship would still be a US citizen. So whatever nonsense they come up with, Obama But the facts are that he was born in Hawaii of a US citizen. He was not born in Kenya not adopted in Indonesia but if he were he would still be a natural born citizen and eligible to be president of the USA.

Perhaps there is consensus on the following; A. There ARE eligibility requirements to be President IAW the Constitution. B. Someone (or many someones) has (have) the responsibility to ENSURE eligibility requirements are met. C. An ineligible candidate should NOT hold the office of the President. OK, here's the fun part; 1. What are the requirements for POTUS? Why? 2. Who was obligated to ensure only valid Presidentail candidates were put before the voting citizenry? 3. Here's the zinger, what do you do prior to inauguration to ensure a candidate has met the requirements? My take- 1. Natural born citizen, at least 35 years of age, and a resident of 14 years. I support the framers contention "natural" born meaning born in US territory to parents of american citizenship. The contention ensures lack of question regarding foreign loyaties. "Natural" is founder language specifically addressing ALLEGIANCE. 2. Candidate is obligated upon demand to provide proof of eligibility to political national committee and State Election Officers (those responsible for setting the ballot). 3. Candidate that is SEEKING office (and taxpayer salary) is obligated to proove without doubt his/her eligibility to assume office (especially in cases of where questions indicate otherwise), the US congress can refuse to accept the votes from the electoral college until such undeniable proof is given, and lastly the courts can compell relevant parties to submit to said obligations or duties. As far as the birth certificate questions, natural born, and whatever else is bugging you about his candidacy...it's the courts or nothing.

The law that clramsay revered to in point 1 had a subsequent paragraph that said the retroactivity was limited to citizens who worked in the US military or for the US government.

By: clramsay But no matter what spin they take he is a natural born US citizen. SO YOU SAY! I want to see his vault birth certificate, would that be OK with you? Seems like a real simple problem to solve. Obama is the problem, he could end this discussion in less than hour with virtually no cost to him. Get serious BHO, why don't you end the debate, RIGHT NOW?

I have to provide my birth certificate or passport annually to work as a DoD contractor, what's the BFD if someone who wants to be president has to?

The essence of the Natural Born issue is that precisely because Obama was a dual citizen at birth he cannot qualify to be a "Natural Born" US citizen. On fightthesmears the claim is made that he is a Native US citizen. They are not the same thing. 'Native' is a bogus, smokescreen term to dupe the average inattentive American into believing this is a non-issue. Where does Obama himself claim to be 'natural born'? He cannot because he is not. This is not a conspiracy. This is the Constitution. No matter what it takes, this issue is not going away. The Wrotnowski case is stronger but with the same argument as Donofrio. There are many other cases heading to SCOTUS. The Constitution must survive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQnL2IwyUAs

This guy is a dangerous pipsqueak who has already proved he can dupe fifty percent of the US voters. Is he also going to dupe the US Supreme Court? He has frequently cavorted with criminals and then he lies about that. WAKE UP liberals. He cannot even give a straight answer when he was asked if he has stopped smoking. Habitual prevaricators are usually guilty of much more egregious behavior. He wants the job of president, my tax money would help pay his salary; I demand to see prove that he meets the qualifications for the job. The poker game bluffing is over BHO, LAY YOUR CARDS ON THE TABLE NOW!

Additional thoughts- 1. We live in a constitutional republic. Period. Republics derive their validity based on the rule of law. Folks who cry “will of the people” and pick and choose which rules are to be obeyed or ignored are treading a path of to potential tyranny (at the very least an illegitimate government). Ask yourself if you want President Bush to hold a third term contrary to the 22nd Amendment. 2. Mr. Obama’s birth certificate issue is a clever ploy to obfuscate the true measure of his eligibility to be President. He is/was a constitutional lawyer; he’s stated that he is a “native” born American with dual citizenship; There should be no doubt he understood ambiguity existed as to his constitutional eligibility to hold the office of the President regarding Article II. The obligation is upon those that SEEK public office to prove eligibility beyond a shadow of a doubt (to self and constituency). To swear an oath to protect, uphold, and defend the Constitution to hold that office with knowing that ambiguity existed is criminal and disingenuous. 3. Who should care that candidates meet eligibility requirements to hold office? Why is it important that requirements are created, expected, and complied? What are the consequences in this situation for malfesiance/misfesiance regarding the highest guiding document of our Nation? What would our founding fathers say about this current situation? What are we doing for the future of our Nation when we shirk the responsibilities of the present? Can an ineligible candidate that has assumed office give a “lawful order” to the United States Armed Forces?