BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 225353 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jan 8, 2009, titled BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen.... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

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 ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#178299 Nov 6, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
And Tacky proves that he's even stupider and less original than Romper. It is always nice to have a goal (I'll bet the two of you cuddle often)
Oooo, did I jerk your chain? Soooo sorry. You are funny when your dander is up!
Learn to Read

United States

#178300 Nov 6, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>Oooo, did I jerk your chain? Soooo sorry. You are funny when your dander is up!
Ooops. Rouge outed himself. Shocking!

Dander? You are even stupider than I thought if you expected your childish Romper impersonation to evoke anything other than pity
Owl Gore

Jacksonville, FL

#178301 Nov 6, 2013
KKK Heroes
The Democrat Party's Long and Shameful History of Bigotry and Racism
http://gopcapitalist.tripod.com/democratrecor...

Since: Feb 11

Nearer than you would like

#178302 Nov 6, 2013
Owl Gore wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't be to sure. With another year of ObamaCare Obama will be lucky to be just tarred and feathered and run out of DC on rail!
Yes, all of those people who could not get healthcare coverage before but will be covered beginning in 2014 will be really mad.
ROTFLMAO!

Since: Feb 11

Nearer than you would like

#178303 Nov 6, 2013
Owl Gore wrote:
<quoted text>
What happens with Uncle Sam runs out of money? Oh, I know, Bernanke will print about $10 Trillion Obama Bucks!
Well, we do have to pay for George W. Bush's fake war and fix the economy he destroyed. Okay, we'll go with your plan.
Dale

United States

#178304 Nov 6, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure Dufus. Obama's days in office are numbered! Any day now .... Well actually a little more than 3 more years - but after that OUT he goes!
LMAO!!! Cancer will run its course, if not treated!!!

Since: Feb 11

Nearer than you would like

#178305 Nov 6, 2013
Owl Gore wrote:
<quoted text>
But more people voted against him than voted for him. He got only 48% of the vote which means 52% voted against him!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_guberna...
1) It was a three way race - a plurality is all that is required. Do you know what that big word means?

2) George W. Bush didn't even receive the majority of the popular vote in his first election. His brother had to rig it for him!

3) I am reminded of this amazing bit of Americana:

"2004-11-05 04:00:00 PDT Washington -- President Bush proclaimed his election as evidence that Americans embrace his plans to reform Social Security, simplify the tax code, curb lawsuits and fight the war on terror, pledging Thursday to work in a bipartisan manner with "everyone who shares our goals."

Bush staked his claim to a broad mandate and announced his top priorities at a post-election news conference, saying his 3.5 million vote victory had won him political capital that he would spend enacting his conservative agenda.

"I earned capital in this campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it," Bush told reporters. "It is my style."

As he had done in his victory speech Wednesday, Bush spoke of building a bipartisan consensus and reaching out to the 48 percent of Americans who voted against him. Yet he made plain that he had no intention of moderating his agenda to reach that goal.

"When you win, there is ... a feeling that the people have spoken and embraced your point of view," Bush said. "And that's what I intend to tell Congress, that I made it clear what I intend to do as the president; now let's work."

McAuliffe feels the same way today.

Try not to get tears on your hood. The big cross burning is tonight and the Klan doesn't like it when you foul their uniforms.

Since: Feb 11

Nearer than you would like

#178306 Nov 6, 2013
Owl Gore wrote:
KKK Heroes
The Democrat Party's Long and Shameful History of Bigotry and Racism
http://gopcapitalist.tripod.com/democratrecor...
The CAPITALIST CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN blog site?

R...O...T...F...L...M...A...O!
Learn to Read

United States

#178307 Nov 6, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Cancer will run its course, if not treated!!!
Well I'm quite certain that you're heavily medicated - but I doubt that your affliction can be cured
Dale

United States

#178308 Nov 6, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
Looks like a bad night for Tepublicans and homophobes (doubly bad for Romper). Tea party losses all over the map, another state rejects Romper-based hate.
LMAO!!! You have to be kidding!!! What happened to the landslide?
I would say the Tea Party did great, since they hadn't any help from the RINOs.
Dale

United States

#178309 Nov 6, 2013
Scrutiny wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't make it through the first sentence without displaying a lack of understanding of the terms you use.
Citizenship is something you are born into.
Allegiance doesn't come from your father or the soil you were born on. Allegiance is a choice you make. It can't be found on a piece of paper. You aren't born with it.
Inseparable?
They have nothing to do with each other.
LMAO!! Think you better check our dictionary, although not usually used, unseparable means the same as inseparable.

Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase:

[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.

So you see that aliens have never been "and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof" this only a condition that is placed upon a citizen.

Now since we all know that Obama has stated many a time that he was a dual-citizen, the above plainly shows he isn't a citizen of the US, since his citizenship and allegiance belonged to his father's country of origin.

The only way Obama can become a citizen, is through the naturalization process.
Learn to Read

United States

#178310 Nov 6, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! You have to be kidding!!! What happened to the landslide?
I would say the Tea Party did great, since they hadn't any help from the RINOs.
Dufus celebrates losing. Declares absolute victory! So out of character
Dale

United States

#178311 Nov 6, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I'm quite certain that you're heavily medicated - but I doubt that your affliction can be cured
LMAO!!! It is well know that liberalism is a terminal mental disorder, if not medicated with vast amounts of conservative serum mixed into a cup of Tea Party.
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#178312 Nov 6, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!!
Nor can it be doubted that it is the inherent right of every independent nation to determine for itself, and according to its own constitution and laws, what classes of persons shall be entitled to its citizenship.
Obama was born a citizen of his father's country, just a truth you can't deny and since the 14th amendment tells us who are citizens I have yet found a dual-citizenship status mentioned, therein.
Bingham was right in 1869, the 14th was ratified in 1868, which precludes children born in this country and subject to a foreign power from receiving US citizenship.
Everyone born on US soil is a Natural Born Citizen except for the people who are not "subject to the jurisdiction of the USA"---which are only foreign diplomats and their families.

Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling:“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”

Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012) ruling:“It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”

Voeltz v. Obama (2nd suit Florida 2012) ruling:“In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a “natural born citizen” even though born in the United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purpose, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”

Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling:“Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co., 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President.… Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”

Farrar (et al.) v. Obama (Georgia 2012) ruling:“In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court”) addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court.[Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).… The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.… This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.”

Fair v. Obama (Maryland 2012) ruling: The issue of the definition of “natural born citizen” is thus firmly resolved by the United States Supreme Court in a prior opinion [US v Wong], and as this court sees it, that holding is binding on the ultimate issue in this case.“

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999)(children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

“Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983)(child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

“Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time.*** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”
Ellen1

Dedham, MA

#178313 Nov 6, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!! Think you better check our dictionary, although not usually used, unseparable means the same as inseparable.
Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase:
[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.
So you see that aliens have never been "and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof" this only a condition that is placed upon a citizen.
Now since we all know that Obama has stated many a time that he was a dual-citizen, the above plainly shows he isn't a citizen of the US, since his citizenship and allegiance belonged to his father's country of origin.
The only way Obama can become a citizen, is through the naturalization process.
Aliens in the USA are subject to the complete jurisdiction of the USA, meaning that they can be tried under US law. The only people in the USA who not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the USA is the children of foreign diplomats. Dual citizenship has no effect on the person being subject to the complete jurisdiction of the USA. Why not? Because everyone IN the USA except for foreign diplomats and their families is subject to the complete (and utter) jurisdiction of the USA.

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999)(children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

“Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983)(child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

“Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time.*** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”

Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974)(child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

“The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.”

What makes the third child different from her siblings? She was born in the USA.
Learn to Read

United States

#178314 Nov 6, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! It is well know that liberalism is a terminal mental disorder, if not medicated with vast amounts of conservative serum mixed into a cup of Tea Party.
So in addition to being completely ignorant of the law and Constitution, you're also a liberal? Explains a lot

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#178315 Nov 6, 2013
Owl Gore wrote:
<quoted text>
But more people voted against him than voted for him. He got only 48% of the vote which means 52% voted against him!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_guberna...
No matter what the name, the math stays the same.
Dale

United States

#178316 Nov 6, 2013
Ellen1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone born on US soil is a Natural Born Citizen except for the people who are not "subject to the jurisdiction of the USA"---which are only foreign diplomats and their families.
Voeltz v. Obama (2nd suit Florida 2012) ruling:“In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a “natural born citizen” even though born in the United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purpose, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”
Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling:“Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co., 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President.… Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Fair v. Obama (Maryland 2012) ruling: The issue of the definition of “natural born citizen” is thus firmly resolved by the United States Supreme Court in a prior opinion [US v Wong], and as this court sees it, that holding is binding on the ultimate issue in this case.“
Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999)(children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):
“Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”
Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983)(child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):
“Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time.*** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”
LMAO!!! Your first sentence invalidated the remainder of your post.
The first amendment is to section one, declaring that all "persons born in the United States and Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside. I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are (*foreigners, aliens,) who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.[1]
* Where did the (*foreigners and aliens) come from or have you forgotten the usage of the comma
Dale

United States

#178317 Nov 6, 2013
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
So in addition to being completely ignorant of the law and Constitution, you're also a liberal? Explains a lot
LMAO!!! Sorry Scooter, ignorant is the distinction you hold and as we can see and you do it very proudly!

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#178318 Nov 6, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!! Think you better check our dictionary, although not usually used, unseparable means the same as inseparable.
Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase:
[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.
So you see that aliens have never been "and subject to the jurisdiction, thereof" this only a condition that is placed upon a citizen.
Now since we all know that Obama has stated many a time that he was a dual-citizen, the above plainly shows he isn't a citizen of the US, since his citizenship and allegiance belonged to his father's country of origin.
The only way Obama can become a citizen, is through the naturalization process.
It isn't often used because unseparable is not a word. Google it and you won't get a definition.

I knew what you meant and didn't point it out.

Allegiance has nothing at all to do with citizenship. As I explained before, allegiance is a conscious choice someone makes to be loyal to someone or something. Being born in Buffalo does not make people loyal to New York.

So... Andrew Jackson was an illegal alien?

Benjamin Franklin was not a legitimate President?

Thomas Jefferson needed naturalized?

Along with 4 or 5 other Presidents such as Herbert Hoover?

Mitt Romney is not a citizen?

Let's see what the Supreme Court has to say about that ridiculous line of crap....

The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: The fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes. The amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born within the territory of the United States of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin's Case, 7 Coke, 6a,'strong enough to make a natural subject, for, if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject'; and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted,'If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.'

FURTHERMORE....

To hold that the fourteenth amendment of the constitution excludes from citizenship the children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of other countries, would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German, or other European parentage, who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.

...US v. WONG KIM ARK (1898)

The Supreme Court seems to think if you are born here... your parent's citizenship doesn't mean shit.

Your opinion doesn't seem to be in line with U.S. law.

How do you fix that?

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
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min ester povington 1,432,539
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 7 min RACE 9,539
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 8 min RACE 2,070
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 10 min RACE 103,628
last post wins! (Apr '13) 1 hr honeymylove 1,697
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr boundary painter 6,752
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 1 hr boundary painter 3,191

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages