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

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#131142 Dec 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>On the other hand he believes in perpetual motion machines that can create energy from nothing, in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics.
Yeah, he seems to have problems understanding all kinds of laws. Gravity must drive him nuts!!
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131143 Dec 2, 2012
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
The rationale of having the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the first sentence of the 14th Amendment wherein it set forth who is a citizen of the United States is to EXCLUDE indians who were members of tribes that existed within the boundaries of the United States. Congress acknowledged that INDIANS were not citizens despite the fact that they lived with the borders of the United States.
That is why the Civil Rights Act of 1866 had language that excluding INDIANS as citizens:
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, EXCLUDING INDIANS NOT TAXED, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States"
In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), Justice Gray noted the legal status of Indians tribes and their members:
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS, DISTINCT POLITICAL COMMUNITIES, with whom the United States might and habitually did deal, as they thought fit, either through treaties made by the President and Senate, or through acts of Congress in the ordinary forms of legislation. The members of those tribes OWED IMMEDIATE ALLEGIANCE TO THEIR SEVERAL TRIBES. and were not part of the people of the United States. Id at 99
The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Your folderol theory that this language also exludes aliens as being subject of the jurisdiction of the United States has no basis in fact or in law.
Do yourself a favor and read the congressional debates during the drafting of the 14th Amendment.
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS.
You shot yourself, last time I checked all Nations other than the US, are Alien Nations.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131144 Dec 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>You can argue that a demonstrably flat tire isn't really flat until the cows come home but it won't get you anywhere. Isn't it time you join the real world?
It is time for everyone to realize that being "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", simply means your are bound to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution, only a citizen enjoys this right.

Since: Dec 11

Fort Worth, TX

#131145 Dec 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS.
You shot yourself, last time I checked all Nations other than the US, are Alien Nations.
WOW! That may be the first time I have ever heard a Native American referred to as an alien! How, exactly, does one justify this???

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#131146 Dec 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS.
You shot yourself, last time I checked all Nations other than the US, are Alien Nations.
They were alien nations and ATF shot you through the head but UR unable to realize it.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131147 Dec 2, 2012
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
The rationale of having the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the first sentence of the 14th Amendment wherein it set forth who is a citizen of the United States is to EXCLUDE indians who were members of tribes that existed within the boundaries of the United States. Congress acknowledged that INDIANS were not citizens despite the fact that they lived with the borders of the United States.
That is why the Civil Rights Act of 1866 had language that excluding INDIANS as citizens:
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, EXCLUDING INDIANS NOT TAXED, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States"
In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), Justice Gray noted the legal status of Indians tribes and their members:
The Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign States; but they were ALIEN NATIONS, DISTINCT POLITICAL COMMUNITIES, with whom the United States might and habitually did deal, as they thought fit, either through treaties made by the President and Senate, or through acts of Congress in the ordinary forms of legislation. The members of those tribes OWED IMMEDIATE ALLEGIANCE TO THEIR SEVERAL TRIBES. and were not part of the people of the United States. Id at 99
The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Your folderol theory that this language also exludes aliens as being subject of the jurisdiction of the United States has no basis in fact or in law.
Do yourself a favor and read the congressional debates during the drafting of the 14th Amendment.
The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Germans, Italians, French, Chinese, etc... are not citizens of the US, and such persons born here of them acquire the citizenship of their father's nation.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131148 Dec 2, 2012
Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW! That may be the first time I have ever heard a Native American referred to as an alien! How, exactly, does one justify this???
Read!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#131149 Dec 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>It is time for everyone to realize that being "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", simply means your are bound to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution, only a citizen enjoys this right.
It's time for Play Justice to realize that subject to the jurisdiction of the United States cannot be changed to "not subject to the jurisdiction thereof" by an infantile change of phrase.
Aliens subject to US laws are subject to US jurisdiction no matter how you slice it. Grow up and put your children's toys away.
wojar wrote:
You can argue that a demonstrably flat tire isn't really flat until the cows come home but it won't get you anywhere. Isn't it time you join the real world?
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131150 Dec 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>They were alien nations and ATF shot you through the head but UR unable to realize it.
you wish!! Puss!!

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#131151 Dec 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>The drafters of the 14th Amendment understood that Indians were not citizens of the United States and as such incorporated "subject to the jurisdictioni thereof" language in the 14th Amendment to EXCLUDE them in setting forth who is a citizen of the United States.
Germans, Italians, French, Chinese, etc... are not citizens of the US, and such persons born here of them acquire the citizenship of their father's nation.
Sorry, Play Justice, but Germans born in the US are not born on German reservations in the US not fully under US jurisdiction. You should write a book: 10,000 ways to miss a simple point.
Jacques Ottawa

Toronto, Canada

#131152 Dec 2, 2012
Terry Buckeye wrote:
<quoted text>
Is Dale for real? I'm coming around to the possibility that he's just pulling our legs. I don't think anyone can be that obtuse and still function. Heck, he even argues against himself at times. I think he's just trying to keep the pot stirred.
Rarely does it occur but I have to disagree. He's too dumb to pull anyone's leg, save his own.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131156 Dec 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
It's time for Play Justice to realize that subject to the jurisdiction of the United States cannot be changed to "not subject to the jurisdiction thereof" by an infantile change of phrase.
Aliens subject to US laws are subject to US jurisdiction no matter how you slice it. Grow up and put your children's toys away.
<quoted text>
Aliens have never been "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", the Constitution. Only citizens are subject to this jurisdiction, to say they are, would be giving them citizenship by just being here.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#131157 Dec 2, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Slopuke likes to switch up jurisdiction and allegiance. That's how he keep his sillyazz game going. I don't think he understands either term. But then again, what can we expect from a pollock!
President James Madison, Chancellor James Kent, Supreme Court Justices over many generations, appellate and district courts of the US "switch up" jurisdiction and allegiance in LRS's play world.

Grow up.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131158 Dec 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, Play Justice, but Germans born in the US are not born on German reservations in the US not fully under US jurisdiction. You should write a book: 10,000 ways to miss a simple point.
Their father's were and the child even born here acquired the citizenship of their father's nation of origin, since he isn't a US citizen.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131159 Dec 2, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Slopuke likes to switch up jurisdiction and allegiance. That's how he keep his sillyazz game going. I don't think he understands either term. But then again, what can we expect from a pollock!
He knows as well as I, Obama is not a US citizen.

The most significant truth to come out of the entire Wong Kim Ark ruling comes from Chief Justice Fuller himself when he said,“the words ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’ in the amendment, were used as synonymous with the words ‘and not subject to any foreign power.’” He was absolutely correct.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#131160 Dec 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Aliens have never been "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", the Constitution. Only citizens are subject to this jurisdiction, to say they are, would be giving them citizenship by just being here.
Sorry Alice, repeating it over and over does nothing but make you look even more foolish, if that's possible.

You cannot negate reality because it does not conform to delusion.
wojar wrote:
It's time for Play Justice to realize that subject to the jurisdiction of the United States cannot be changed to "not subject to the jurisdiction thereof" by an infantile change of phrase.
Aliens subject to US laws are subject to US jurisdiction no matter how you slice it. Grow up and put your children's toys away.
<quoted text>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

#131161 Dec 2, 2012
Justice Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Their father's were and the child even born here acquired the citizenship of their father's nation of origin, since he isn't a US citizen.
Nope, their fathers were not born on German reservations in the US either.

BTW, German citizenship by descent does not depend upon on US (or any foreign) law and vice versa. A child born in England in 1930 of a German father and British mother was both German and British.

UR not working with a full deck.
wojar wrote:
Sorry, Play Justice, but Germans born in the US are not born on German reservations in the US not fully under US jurisdiction. You should write a book: 10,000 ways to miss a simple point.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131164 Dec 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Alice, repeating it over and over does nothing but make you look even more foolish, if that's possible.
You cannot negate reality because it does not conform to delusion.
<quoted text>
In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, the court was specifically asked to address “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” and held it meant:


The persons declared to be citizens are “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them (U.S.) direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired.

We know for a fact, Obama was born a citizen of his father's nation, since his father was never a citizen, nor had the intent to become a citizen of the US.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131165 Dec 2, 2012
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, their fathers were not born on German reservations in the US either.
BTW, German citizenship by descent does not depend upon on US (or any foreign) law and vice versa. A child born in England in 1930 of a German father and British mother was both German and British.
UR not working with a full deck.
<quoted text>
Sorry, the US Constitution does not recognize a dual-citizenship.
Obama was born a citizen of his father's nation, this you can't deny.
Justice Dale

Wichita, KS

#131166 Dec 2, 2012
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
100% correct. Mobarf is into troll games. I guess we could humor him a bit longer. LOL
I think he soils himself everyday!!

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
Deat Abby 12-16 6 min Mister Tonka 49
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 10 min new yawk 1,152,964
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 46 min TRD 68,875
sexting on whatsapp 1 hr cute_bwoy 1
14-Year-Old Boy Shot In Head On Far South Side 2 hr Taint Shield 4
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr kal 49,174
best joke (Oct '09) 3 hr Always Smile 526
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

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 12:41 pm PST

NBC Sports12:41PM
Bears' Trestman aware of speculation about future - NBC Sports
Yahoo! Sports 1:20 PM
Chicago sportscaster apologizes for tasteless joke in Cutler pun
NFL 1:47 PM
One Preview: Passing and rushing yardage leaders meet in Big D
NBC Sports 1:57 PM
Marc Trestman: It's evident I haven't gotten best from Jay Cutler
ESPN 3:42 PM
Source: Bears to start Clausen over Cutler