BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ... Full Story
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130448 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You consider $5M to a charity a stunt? Wonder how the charities feel about that? Omama didn't "cowboy up"! sad very sad
(1) when a supporter of your political opponent makes you an offer, it is common sense to ignore it; (2) It is not a good precedent for the President of the United States to do something for an offer of money by an individual, even if the money is for charity; (3) if Trump wanted to give $5 million to charity, he could give it without making an "offer" to Obama.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130449 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>That is right, not being subject to the jurisdiction, thereof, must mean you belong to another country.(ref. 14th amend)
The only people in the USA who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the USA are foreign diplomats and their families.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#130450 Nov 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is a decision by the US Army Judge Advocate General's office that says that a US-born child whose father was a German citizen who was never naturalized is a Natural Born US Citizen. And it specifically says that dual citizenship does not affect the situation.
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2010/0...
Moreover, sadly you have not been following CONSERVATIVE legal principles. Conservatives have always said that foreign laws do not affect, and cannot be allowed to affect US laws. And in the case of dual citizenship that is exactly right, US law does not allow foreign laws to affect US Citizen status (or as the JAG ruling shows, NBC status), and yet you think that they do.
Well, that is giving entirely too much power to foreign laws, a most non-conservative thing to do. And besides, it is not the law, foreign citizenship laws simply have NO effect on US citizens in the USA.
Excellent point.

Foreign nation's citizenship laws do not have any legal effect upon a person born in the United States to alien parents until such time that person chooses to reside in that foreign nation.
Moreover, that same person is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States while residing in the United States. No foreign nation has any jurisdiction over its citizens while they reside in the United States.

Without entering upon this subject (which properly belongs to a general treatise upon public law), it may be truly said that no nation is bound to respect the laws of another nation made in regard to the subjects of the latter which are nonresidents. The obligatory force of such laws of any nation cannot extend beyond its own territories. Whatever may be the intrinsic or obligatory force of such laws upon such persons, if they should return to their native country, they can have none in other nations wherein they reside. Such laws may give rise to personal relations between the sovereign and subjects, to be enforced in his own domains; but they do not rightfully extend to other nations. Rundell v. La Campagnie Generale Transatlantique, 100 Fed. 655, 660 (7th Cir. 1900)(quoting Justice Story, Commentaries of the Conflict of Laws (section 22)(1834)
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130451 Nov 28, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
He wasn't born a subject of another nation per US law, under the US Constitution. US law is concerned with who is a citizen or who is not a citizen per US law, and is not dependent on foreign law. Foreign law has no force or effect within the US. The US is a sovereign nation, not a British colony. Sorry, British law cannot determine who is a US citizen.
<quoted text>
if foreign law has no force, why do we have a naturalization process?
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130452 Nov 28, 2012
Grand Bither wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's yet another issue on which the Supreme Court disagrees with birfoons.
Why are birfoons always wrong?
Birfoons do like to agree with the supreme court when it suits them. Like the re-affirmation of the 2nd amendment. Oh, they love the supremes on that one.

And do we hear the so-called "libtards" (rogue tm reg'd) go on and on about that one? For months, years, criticize the judgement? No. Why? Because the Supreme court has spoken and not everyone will agree, but hey, you go on with life. Birthers and tea partyers can't do that, they stamp their little feet and turn blue instead. Pathetic.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130453 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>you still having problems, reading?
YOU have problems writing. Why the comma following "problems?". Punctuation not your strong suit, is it? Second time in 3 days you made the same mistake.
Johannes

Yucaipa, CA

#130454 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You consider $5M to a charity a stunt? Wonder how the charities feel about that? Omama didn't "cowboy up"! sad very sad
Oh get real! Just about everything Trump does is for his publicity.

Obama is not required to participate in Trump stunts. End of story.

Hey, since Donald has so much money, why doesn't he give some to charity?...quietly...
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130455 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>if foreign law has no force, why do we have a naturalization process?
So that the former foreigners can vote, of course. Moreover, a naturalized US citizen has the protection of the USA when traveling abroad, which foreigners do not have.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130456 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>if foreign law has no force, why do we have a naturalization process?
We have about 196 countries on this planet. Each has its own laws. Those laws count in each respective country and NEVER across its borders into another sovereign country. Geez.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130457 Nov 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Dream on. That is your fantasy. The law holds that every child born in the USA except for the children of foreign diplomats is a Natural Born US Citizen.
not so, the law states, you must be "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", the US Constitution. Those born here that are subjects of, or subject to any foreign power, do not acquire US citizenship.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#130459 Nov 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
(1) when a supporter of your political opponent makes you an offer, it is common sense to ignore it; (2) It is not a good precedent for the President of the United States to do something for an offer of money by an individual, even if the money is for charity; (3) if Trump wanted to give $5 million to charity, he could give it without making an "offer" to Obama.
Do you think repeating the same old shat over and over makes one bit of difference? I guess you missed the point. It was a challenge to Omama and Omama declined. Makes no sense if his papers are all legit! What is Omama hiding? Something, that's for sure.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130460 Nov 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The only people in the USA who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the USA are foreign diplomats and their families.
aliens have never been "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof",(US Constitution), this is only the right of a citizen, you know "We the People of the United States".
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130462 Nov 28, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU have problems writing. Why the comma following "problems?". Punctuation not your strong suit, is it? Second time in 3 days you made the same mistake.
Why not?
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130463 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>not so, the law states, you must be "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", the US Constitution. Those born here that are subjects of, or subject to any foreign power, do not acquire US citizenship.
Every child born in the USA except for the children of foreign diplomats is a Natural Born US Citizen. Everyone who is in the USA even if only visiting is subject to the jurisdiction of the USA except for foreign diplomats.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#130464 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Why not?
Because it's incorrect and misplaced punctuation. How can pause after "problems"? You didn't write those perfectly-written depositions when discussing the constitution. You are incapable of even knowing where to place a comma.
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130465 Nov 28, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>aliens have never been "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof",(US Constitution), this is only the right of a citizen, you know "We the People of the United States".
If aliens are in the USA and are not foreign diplomats, they are subject to the USA because they must obey the laws of the USA. Foreign diplomats, who are not subject to the USA do not have to obey the laws of the USA (but if they don't, we can declare them persona non grata, and send them home).
American Lady

Danville, KY

#130466 Nov 28, 2012
My posts aren't showing up :(
Ellen1

Arlington, MA

#130467 Nov 28, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think repeating the same old shat over and over makes one bit of difference? I guess you missed the point. It was a challenge to Omama and Omama declined. Makes no sense if his papers are all legit! What is Omama hiding? Something, that's for sure.
It is a good thing that Obama declined. It would not be a good precedent for the president of the USA to do ANYTHING for a money offer from a rich person, even if the money were to be given to charity.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130468 Nov 28, 2012
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
So that the former foreigners can vote, of course. Moreover, a naturalized US citizen has the protection of the USA when traveling abroad, which foreigners do not have.
So, foreigners don't have the protection of their country when traveling abroad?
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#130469 Nov 28, 2012
Jacques Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
We have about 196 countries on this planet. Each has its own laws. Those laws count in each respective country and NEVER across its borders into another sovereign country. Geez.
I guess every treaty is void.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 20 min Bluestater 1,156,052
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 52 min No Warming 49,335
For a meat-centric dinner, meet at Skrine Chops (Jan '08) 5 hr Reddog 6
delhi female 7 hr yatharth 1
Fight at Navy Pier 7 hr joey 1
abby 12-26 8 hr Mister Tonka 4
amy 12-26 8 hr Mister Tonka 4
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 4:00 am PST

Bleacher Report 4:00AM
Colts' Complete Week 17 Preview vs. Titans
Bleacher Report 6:00 AM
Bears vs. Vikings: What Experts Are Saying About Chicago
NBC Sports 6:03 AM
Jim Caldwell: No concerns about starting a rookie center
Bleacher Report 8:46 AM
What Are Experts Saying About Vikings?
NBC Sports11:28 AM
Bears extend Roberto Garza through 2015