BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 214458 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.

The Honorable Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#182758 Dec 22, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
P.S.: Oh, forgot about your excuse for you off-prediction for Obama's re-election. It's those damn polls that misled you, right up to the eve of election night
No, it was all the voter fraud! How many times must you be told?

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#182759 Dec 22, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Only citizens have Constitutional Right, aliens while in the country are controlled/protected by treaties.
If an alien was subject to the jurisdiction, thereof, we wouldn't need treaties, would we.
That is strange. US Supreme Court in its decisions doesn't make any reference to any treaties when it plainly states that "Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as "persons" guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments" . Pyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211 (1982)

Furthermore, the US Supreme Court noted "By the law of nations, doubtless, aliens residing in a country, with the intention of making it a permanent place of abode, acquire, in one sense, a domicil there; and, while they are permitted by the nation to retain such a residence and domicil, are subject to its laws, and may invoke its protection against other nations." Fong Yue Ting v. United Sates, 149 U.S. 6698, 724 (1893)

It is a dilemma for LMAO Dale. The Supreme Court observed that it is BY THE LAW OF NATIONS that aliens are subject to a country's laws while they are residing in it. If the US Constitution is the SUPREME LAW of the law then how is it that aliens are NOT SUBJECT and thereby under the jursidiction of the US Constitution?

There are two answers to the above question either the US Supreme Court is right in that aliens are subject and thereby under the JURISDICTION of the United States or LMAO Dale is right in that aliens are not subject and thereby are not under the JURISDICTION of the United States. Both can't be right.
Dale

United States

#182760 Dec 22, 2013
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
That is strange. US Supreme Court in its decisions doesn't make any reference to any treaties when it plainly states that "Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as "persons" guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments" . Pyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211 (1982)
Furthermore, the US Supreme Court noted "By the law of nations, doubtless, aliens residing in a country, with the intention of making it a permanent place of abode, acquire, in one sense, a domicil there; and, while they are permitted by the nation to retain such a residence and domicil, are subject to its laws, and may invoke its protection against other nations." Fong Yue Ting v. United Sates, 149 U.S. 6698, 724 (1893)
It is a dilemma for LMAO Dale. The Supreme Court observed that it is BY THE LAW OF NATIONS that aliens are subject to a country's laws while they are residing in it. If the US Constitution is the SUPREME LAW of the law then how is it that aliens are NOT SUBJECT and thereby under the jursidiction of the US Constitution?
There are two answers to the above question either the US Supreme Court is right in that aliens are subject and thereby under the JURISDICTION of the United States or LMAO Dale is right in that aliens are not subject and thereby are not under the JURISDICTION of the United States. Both can't be right.
LMAO!!! So, you haven't an answer! I have plainly show you that alien are controlled/protected by treaties and never subject to the jurisdiction, thereof (US Constitution) and all you can do is obfuscate.
If aliens were subject to the jurisdiction, thereof (US Constitution), they would have the same rights as a US citizen, yes/no!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182761 Dec 22, 2013
You would have thought people would have learned after the Chick-fil-A incident where their customers stand!!!

Cracker Barrel: We screwed up big time
By Todd Starnes - Published December 22, 2013 - FoxNews.com

“We were flat out wrong."

That’s the message Cracker Barrel is sending to enraged customers after the restaurant chain removed Duck Dynasty items from its stores over fears it might offend people.

“Our intent was to avoid offending but that’s just what we’ve done,” Cracker Barrel said in a statement posted on its Facebook page.“You told us we made a mistake. And, you weren’t shy about it. You wrote, you called and you took to social media to express your thoughts and feelings.”

One of those customers was Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. He said his family has eaten in nearly every Cracker Barrel in the country.

“Cracker Barrel must be off their rocker,” he said in a statement to Fox News.“For Cracker Barrel to take the bait of an organization like GLAAD, which has led the attack on Phil Robertson, they are betraying the values of the vast majority of their customers.”

The restaurant chain known for its country cooking admitted they were wrong and not only offered an apology, but ordered Duck Dynasty products be returned to their stores immediately.

“Today, we are putting all our Duck Dynasty products back in our stores,” Cracker Barrel stated.“And, we apologize for offending you.”

Cracker Barrel took action on Friday after Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson was indefinitely suspended from the popular A&E show for making comments the network found offensive to homosexuals.

Workers were instructed to remove all merchandise that featured Robertson, local reports alleged.

The outrage and condemnation from loyal Cracker Barrel customers was swift. Thousands posted messages on Facebook vowing to eat their biscuits and country fried steak somewhere else.

Among those who took offense was former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

“I have no respect for a company that bows to the slightest pressure from the politically correct,” Huckabee wrote on Facebook.

Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. Sign up for his American Dispatch newsletter, be sure to join his Facebook page, and follow him on Twitter. His latest book is Dispatches From Bitter America.

Todd Starnes

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182762 Dec 22, 2013
And the Libtards will never "get it" either!!! Oh, how many people really watch Piers Morgan anyway?

Piers Morgan: The 1st Amendment Shouldn’t Apply to Phil Robertson
Posted By Philip Hodges on Dec 21, 2013

According to CNN’s most tolerant Brit, Robertson is a “vile bigot,” and in the same way that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t apply to semi-automatic rifles, the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply to “racist homophobes” like Phil Robertson. What he’s trying to ban is exactly the sort of thing that the 1st Amendment protects. Politically incorrect speech.

Read more at http://lastresistance.com/4112/piers-morgan-1...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182763 Dec 22, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! See, I told everyone you would get funnier as the day goes on!
Crazy Frenchies
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup...

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182764 Dec 22, 2013
The Honorable Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Clowns, burfoons and buffoons? LMAO! How Ivy League of you! LMAO! And, "laughed out of oblivion"????? LMAO!!!
Ivy league? Me? Why, thank you.

Yes, out of oblivion. So bad, he was thrown out of oblivion.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182765 Dec 22, 2013
The Honorable Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it was all the voter fraud! How many times must you be told?
I mentioned that one also, can't your read? Remember the condoms and cellulars?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182766 Dec 22, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea, isn't it sad that you Libtards continue to believe Obamacare will work!
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>It is sad that millions of Obama supporters still idolize him as if he ever did any thing for their best interest.
Well, Libtards believe that if Obamacare does not work, it will because of those evil Conservatives are undermining it. Libtards can never point their fingers at themselves.
Dale

United States

#182767 Dec 22, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
I mentioned that one also, can't your read? Remember the condoms and cellulars?
LMAO!!! Silly boy, you can't remember who you post, much less what you post!!!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#182768 Dec 22, 2013
loose cannon wrote:
Jacques,
Over 7,000 flights have been delayed or cancled due to typical wintery weather again this weekend.
loose
Hummmm, must be Global Warming!!00,000 cattle killed in South Dakota during a blizzard in ....... early October?!?

South Dakota ranchers reel after 'catastrophic' storm leaves up to 100,000 cattle dead

By Joshua Rhett Miller - Published October 13, 2013 - FoxNews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/13/south-da...
Dale

United States

#182770 Dec 22, 2013
Miller time!! Hope this gotdam POS works better tomorrow. Hell, it only took 4 minutes to type this!!!

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#182771 Dec 22, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Crazy Frenchies
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup...
You crazy Brit.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#182773 Dec 22, 2013
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. It seems that the US Supreme Court feels that the protection under the US Constitution applies equally to citizens and aliens within the United States.
The US Supreme Court has held numerous times that an alien has the same Constitutional rights as those of a US citizen.(Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 369 (1886) "rights of every citizen of the United States equally with those of the strangers and aliens who now invoke the jurisdiction of the court.");(Pyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211 (1982) Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is surely a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term. Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as "persons" guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.)
Since the US Supreme Court has held that an alien is a "person" with the same Constitutional rights as a US citizen then why isn't the alien under the jurisdiction of the Constitution? Since if he weren't under the jurisdiction of the Constitution then he would not be protected by the same Constitutional rights as those of a US citizen.
The only time that an alien as not subject to the rights of the Constitution is if that alien was OUTSIDE THE boundaries of the United States.("There is likewise no indication that the Fourth Amendment was understood by contemporaries of the Framers to apply to activities of the United States directed against aliens in foreign territory or in international waters" United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 US 259, 267 (1990))
As such, as long as alien is within the boundaries of the United States he or she is afforded the same Constitutional protections as those of a US citizen.
That will go right over the head of Dale.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#182774 Dec 22, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Dummy, we could boil him in oil, if we wanted and without a trial, since there are no reciprocal treaties.
We couldn't do a thing (legally) without jurisdiction. Moron.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#182775 Dec 22, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Sorry, but that is not the case, only citizens are "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", remember "We the People".
Ha ha! Dufus Dale insists that "all persons" as recited in the Constitution doesn't mean "all persons."

This is because he seems to realize that if a = a, Dufus 's Pathetic fantasy is a -- Pathetic fantasy.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>"All persons" in the Constitution refers to all persons. Not just citizens.

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

#182776 Dec 22, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! So, you haven't an answer! I have plainly show you that alien are controlled/protected by treaties and never subject to the jurisdiction, thereof (US Constitution) and all you can do is obfuscate.
If aliens were subject to the jurisdiction, thereof (US Constitution), they would have the same rights as a US citizen, yes/no!
Simple answer is yes. Aliens have the same rights as citizens that are set forth in the U.S. Constitution.

Don't take my word for it. Take US Supreme Court word for it:

1.“The fourteenth amendment to the constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens......' These provisions are universal in their application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality;" Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 369 (1886)

2. "[I]t must be concluded that all persons within the territory of the United States are entitled to the protection guaranteed by those amendments, and that even aliens shall not be held to answer for a capital or other infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." Wong Wing v. U.S. 163 U.S. 228,238 (1896)

3. " Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as "persons" guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments." ). Pyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211 (1982)

4. "Chinese laborers, therefore, like all other aliens residing in the United States for a shorter or longer time, are entitled, so long as they are permitted by the government of the United States to remain in the country, to the safeguards of the Constitution," Fong Yue Ting v. United Sates, 149 U.S. 6698, 724 (1893)

5. "There are literally millions of aliens within the jurisdiction of the United States. The Fifth Amendment, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment, protects every one of these persons from deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.(internal citations omitted) Even one whose presence in this country is unlawful, involuntary, or transitory is entitled to that constitutional protection." Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67, 77,(1976)

6. "We know from more than a century of Supreme Court case law that foreign citizens in the United States enjoy many of the same constitutional rights that U.S. citizens do. Luman v. Federal Election Com’n , 800 F. Supp. 2d 281, 286 (D.C. 2011)

I have given you five Supreme Court cases along with one District Court case that state that
an alien has the same constitutuional rights as that of a U.S. citizen. Now all you have to do is simple to find any case law that suports your argument that an alien is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and as such doesn't have the same constitutional rights as that of a U.S. citizen.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#182777 Dec 22, 2013
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Sorry, but that is not the case, only citizens are "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof", remember "We the People".
Wowee Zowee, according to Dufus logic, "We the people" means that all"all persons" doesn't mean all persons.

Moron.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#182778 Dec 22, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you still hoping for change? We Conservatives are hoping to return to the future of America.
I don't want gay people to be beheaded.
Returning to the future? Do you have a time machine? You cannot return to the past and certain.ly not to the future.
wojar

Bristol, CT

#182779 Dec 22, 2013
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
United States makes treaties with foreign nations not with aliens.
In LMAO Dale's world, US makes a treaty with each and every alien residing in the US. It is a dilemma for LMAO Dale.
Ha!

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 Incognito4Ever 1,383,376
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 1 hr PEllen 1,518
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 1 hr PEllen 2,432
News Barber shop shooting leaves 1 dead, 1 injured; ... 1 hr ASNMC 1
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr PEllen 8,414
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr PEllen 6,164
Do the fatties under the Hijab swelter?? Ask th... 1 hr zeke the pinhead 1
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 2 hr Sublime1 102,009
Observations 10 hr A Noted Observer 21
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages