Bummer. Obama Will Ignore Judge’s Ruling to Appear in Georgia Court

A judge has ordered President Barack Obama to appear in court in Atlanta this week for a hearing on a complaint that says Obama isn’t a natural-born citizen and can’t be president.

Article II Superpac will provide live streaming video from the court on Thursday starting at 9:00 AM.
Hat Tip Mara

Despite the judge’s request the Ulsterman Report learned that President Obama will not be appearing in court. He will be campaigning in Las Vegas instead.
Bummer. That would have been quite a show.

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Conservative to the Core

    Orly Taitz tells us that [the lawyer challenging Obama’s eligibility] “is planning to challenge Romney as well. I will not be an attorney on the challenge of Romney, as there is no evidence to support such challenge. Even though Romney’s father was born in Mexico, he was a US citizen. Romney was born to two US citizens in the US. As I am still in CA, I have no control of what a client says to NBC in GA.”

  • iamsaved

    Seems simple enough. Since Obama won’t appear in court, the judge should rule that Obama cannot appear on the Georgia ballot for President.

  • RedBeard

    None of this matters. These cases will drag through the courts for years, with rulings one way and then another, appeals, and denials of appeal. By the time anything gets resolved, Obama could have finished his second term of wrecking the country. We need to put all our efforts into defeating Obama at the polls in November. Nothing else is important, by comparison.

  • Sam Stone

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/10/18/4-supreme-court-cases-define-natural-born-citizen/

    Very good read on the term “natural born citizen”.

    Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

    This case concerned Mrs. Happersett, an original suffragette, who in virtue of the 14th Amendment attempted to register to vote in the State of Missouri, and was refused because she was not a man. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in that year, wrote the majority opinion, in which he stated:

    The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.

    It is agreed that Obama was born in Hawaii, is 35 years old and a resident of the US for 14 years. The last qualifier remains, is he a “natural born citizen”?

    He admits in his book Dreams from my father that his father was never an American citizen, thus Obama does not meet the “natural born” requirement.

  • Mary

    If anyone thought BHO would actually appear in court and validate the claim, I’d like to have some of what they are smokin’.
    I hope like heck this is the beginning of his undoing, but we saw what happened with the Clintons; BHO is even more protected they they were (are). Not holding my breath.
    God Bless all those who have worked so hard to make people understand that BHO is NOT eligible to be POTUS…
    Check out TheObamaFile.com; Beckwith is amazing.

  • Multitude

    If you’re not a natural born citizen and you have diplomatic immunity from your Kenyan passport and recognized international political role, you don’t have to show up for court.

    :)

    Actually, Obama understands the State of Exception, where he has become the law through his practice of a government that is entirely based on executive imperial interpretation. Drone strikes killing Americans without due process or even a charge of a crime? Expansion of domestic spying? Growth in illegal rendition? Deciding to be in charge of Senate, determining when it is and isn’t in session? Courts are invisible to his superpowers.

  • Sam Stone

    #1, GOOD! ALL those running should meet the 4 simplest requirements in all of government.

    Try taking your age, time in the US and your birth certificate to your local energy supplier and try to get an account opened.

  • Sam Stone

    Red Beard, cases like this with the importance it has to our Constitution, can be fast tracked just like ObamaCare has been.

  • Militant Conservative

    Obama, just send in you passport from your

    Indonesia Trip, if you even have one.

  • Bill Mitchell

    Wow, Newt at 60 on Intrade for Florida. Team Romney has got to be sh*tting bricks. And this is before we’ve even had a debate.

  • Bill Mitchell

    Two new pols showing Gingrich up by +8 in FL. Lol, this is just too good.

  • olm

    Or your records from Occidental.
    This is what is at work. Democrat no vetting. Republican vetting, we want to know how often you fart each day.
    Bottom line is that even Democrats need to prove eligibility before an election. Obama is not eligiblle, I firmly believe that.. There has to be a system in place that checks this before a candidate starts the primary process. Which, of course. will never happen until the Republicans run someone who is not eligible.

  • Sasja

    I found this interesting re natural born citizen. As for Romney, briefly, from what I have read, since his grandparents did not renounce their US citizenship and become citizens of Mexico, and since Mexico did not consider them citizens, George Romney would be considered natural born.

    http://www.federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined/

  • Sam Stone

    My question is this, what becomes of every piece of legislation and every Executive Order signed by Obama if he is found to be ineligible to be POTUS?

    This could prove to be the biggest Constitutional crisis on our lifetimes.

  • YES WE CON!

    What you WILL NEVER see on TV: Obama’s Forged Birth Certificate… 100% Proof, in less than 3 minutes – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMBAJGQcEnQ

  • Sam Stone

    “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”

    The writers of the document purposely differentiated in these words “natural born citizen” and just plain “citizen”. The wording “or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution” was to allow the framers to run for President.

  • OlgaCentura

    Isn’t that contempt of a court order to appear?

  • Greg

    Probably not contempt or court as much as cause for the court to rule against wtf and bar him from the ballot. That forces wtf to take affirmative action to get back on the ballot which will promote disclosure

  • YES WE CON!

    *****NOT EVEN LEGALLY ELIGIBLE TO MAKE THE DONUTS*****

    6 years ago, “Dunkin Donuts” mandated that ALL employees must pass the FEDS ‘E-Verify’ database successfully, in order to work there.

    Barry FAILED E-Verify – http://www.ObamaReleaseYourRecords.blogspot.com/2011/09/failed-e-verify-letter-to-barack-obama.html

  • Sasja

    I would not expect any president to appear. If that were the case, than any group or individual could file one lawsuit after another against a sitting president, no matter who it is, and have him hoppin’ from one court to another. Ain’t gonna happen. I would expect the president to respond to the court’s request via his attorneys and that would include producing any documents ordered by the court.

    Zero’s father was not a US citizen at the time of his birth. And that alone should disqualify him.

  • BridgetGB

    Thursday should give Vegas Conservatives enough time to put together a large, peaceful protest rally where the job slayer in chief is planning to stuff cash into his campaign coffers.

    If we all do one thing in the coming months it must be to work & unseat this regime.

    Drop off voter registration forms at your local gun store.
    Walk precincts for the GOP Nominee.
    Apply at the Cty Clerk’s office and be a Poll Worker.
    Or … be a Poll Watcher on Election Day.

  • MikeSilver

    #1 …. Are they really going to do that to Romney? Oh boy. That is what I call a Two-Fer. We get rid of obama and his republican twin.

    Any Gateway Pundit Members in ATL going to the hearing? I’m going to try.

  • Pingback: Bummer. Obama Will Ignore Judge’s Ruling to Appear in Georgia Court()

  • Pingback: Bummer. Obama Will Ignore Judge’s Ruling to Appear in Georgia Court | ()

  • VengefulSpatula

    Didn’t trump already cover the crazy birther saga, which made Obama show his birth certificate?

    The birther people are just as crazy as the 9/11 truthers, as far as I’m concerned.

  • Pingback: Bummer. Obama Will Ignore Judge’s Ruling to Appear in Georgia Court | Nice Messages()

  • Sam Stone

    VengefulSpatula , it would help to actually know what the case is about before you opine.

    It is not about birth certificates or where Obama was born since that is irrelevant to the case. The case is about whether or not Obama is a “natural born citizen”. Not where he was born.

  • Remco Kimber

    #2,
    Seems simple enough. Since Obama won’t appear in court, the judge should rule that Obama cannot appear on the Georgia ballot for President.

    DEAD ON SOLUTION,

  • http://biggovernment.com gee!

    The damage has already been done…………….Dictator-in-chief decides what is constitional and what the checks and balances of this nation should be………….if anyone speak-out- or disagrees with his laws will be declare a suspected terrorist and carted off not to be heard or seen……we haven’t seen nothing yet…….be prepare for coming storm………..just sayin

  • DINORightMarie

    According to Georgia law, failure to obey a subpoena is a misdemeanor – which meets terms for a president’s impeachment: “…high crimes and misdemeanors….”

    If he doesn’t appear, he will have committed a crime, similar to Slick Willy (Clinton) who lied under oath, which is perjury (lying under oath) – another misdemeanor.

    (BTW-that is what Bill Clinton was impeached for – NOT for cheating on Hillary with Monica.)

    But, why obey the law…..Obama has already declared himself above the law, with no limits on his power? Besides, Harry Reid will NEVER impeach Obama, even if Boehner had the guts to bring it up for a vote.

  • Bloodless Coup

    If Obama fails to appear in court on Thursday there will most likely be a Default Judgment against him and he will not be permitted to be placed on the Ballot in the State of Georgia.

    Also I believe that a legal precedent will be set which will make it possible for Obama to be challenged and removed from the Ballot in several other states.

  • cal rifkin

    When will this ever be debated in the major press? Why won’t anyone talk about it???

  • http://biggovernment.com gee!

    #33…………because they are apart of fraud ……….their all in on it…………..the media and judges, members of congress………..socialist have been planning this for many years………….just sayin

  • HadEnough

    I think Newt or Romney need to start doing their homework on this case so that they will be prepared to take the media to task on this issue. Mention it in one debate or one ad and see if it takes off………

  • Pingback: Bummer. Obama Will Ignore Judge’s Ruling to Appear in Georgia Court | Liberal Whoppers()

  • http:[email protected] calvin

    till racist peep

  • http:[email protected] Whatis this world coming too

    It is a shame that this country is so crazy that itiot run around worrying about a man birth certificate to be President, when he has already proven it. it is sad, so sad. But like i say it can be America and no where else just “prejuduce”

    But you have a man running for president that singles out a culture about food stamps and no one see him as a odd ball, as well as how he has left wives that are sick.

    The people who are spending this amount of time on a naturalization, could be doing something like helping the poor or something to better the world.

    All I say to them is there is a greater power to judge you.

  • Agathon

    Orly Taitz is a paranoid crackpot who has never won a case and probably never will. The birther issue is a dead end. Get over it.

  • Sam Stone

    Whatis this world coming too, it has NOTHING to do with his birth certificate!

    Why do people comment when they have no clue about what they are commenting on?

    It has to do with whether he meet the Constitutional requirement of being a “natural born citizen” as opposed to a “citizen” which is NOT in the Constitution as a requirement.

    SCOTUS has ruled a few times that “natural born” means born to TWO US citizen parents and Obama has admitted he was not.

    Why not let this case proceed and let the ruling stand as we do with all court cases?

    What are you people afraid of?

  • Pingback: Monday Roundup 1/23/12 Sunshine Debate and Coulter’s Head Explodes Edition | Katy Pundit()

  • valerie

    An “appearance” in court is not necessarily a physical visit to the courthouse. In this case, BO could “appear” by filing a paper through counsel.

    Also, this case could be handled very simply with a 1-page brief (yes, there are lawyers that could manage to file 25 pages on this) with suitable attachments. It would be simple, cheap, and easy for any natural-born citizen of the US to make this case go away permanently.

  • HadEnough

    @Sam Stone — People like to use the term “oh you’re a birther” just like they do “racist”. God forbid that you would be against somebody’s policies or a simple fact that rules were set and established for a reason….oh we’ll just ignore those stupid rules won’t we……..we are seeing the results of that type of blind sheeple following that we see with those that have and still support Odumbo……

  • Adi

    I thought The Wohn is too busy governing, instead of campaigning.

  • tj

    We live in a cesspool of corruption. Nice to see one judge finaly stand up and objectively ask the question.
    Keep in mind however, Republicans have allowed this criminal coup to happen as much as the Democrats who perpetuated this fraud upon the American people.

    Few have the courage of conviction to learn the truth.

  • Mahdi Al-Dajjal

    Obama might not have to appear in person but SOMEBODY representing him MUST appear that day, as ordered. If they fail to appear then they face a variety of things including a default judgment being entered against them, i.e., they lose the case for failing to challenge the allegations made against them, including a contempt charge.

  • GMiller

    Facts on natural born Citizenship: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html
    Ballot Challenges: http://obamaballotchallenge.com

  • Koda

    A “Natural Born CItizen” is one that was born in the U.S.

    If you believe otherwise, you’ve been reading to many garbled birther interpretations
    and rumours.

    His mother was a citizen. He was born in Hawaii. Therefore, he is a “Natural Born Citizen”.
    The nationality of his father is irrelevant. What country Obama lived in from the ages of
    6-10 is irrelevant. Whether or not Indonesia allowed dual citizenship is irrelevant.

    In the eyes of the U.S. government, he was a Natural Born U.S. citezen from the time
    of birth, until present. U.S. citizenship is not revoked on the authority of the Indonensian
    government. It is not revoked due to adoption by a non-US citizen. It is not given up when
    one is taken to live in another country as a child.

    The U.S. does not so easily cut its citizens free.

    You don’t have to take my word for it. The info is all available from the U.S. government itself.
    Start reading into U.S. law, instead of getting your info from birther sites, or making up your own interpreations.

  • aprilnovember811

    He obeys no laws, and they keep letting him do it. We have no Congress anymore. They’ve all failed America.

  • Hank

    Cite the SOB for contempt of court.

  • http://thegatewaypundit.com David m Bellflower

    I have to go to court next week what do you think would happen if i chose to ignore the judges order to appear? hmmmmm?

  • Catblaster

    Isn’t this contempt of court? And here I thought no man was above the law…silly moi.

  • http://www.giftstogreatness.com Sharron McPherson

    I believe that Koda above got it right. As an attorney, it’s clear to me that Obama is, in fact, a natural born citizen. He was born in Hawaii to a mother who was an American citizen. End of story. I find it deeply disturbing that we’ve descended to such a state of affairs concerning a sitting President. Whether I disagree with his policies or not, the country was broken when he took over. His name was George W. and even his Daddy thought he was an idiot. A legitimate question is whether Obama, in fact, is required to respond to such a ridiculous subpoena in the first place. Whatever our feelings about the politics of Obama, let’s be intelligent – please.

  • Sam Stone

    Koda commented: A “Natural Born CItizen” is one that was born in the U.S.

    Could not be more uninformed or wrong! did you not see the Supreme Court cases that stated a “natural born citizen” is born to 2 parents that are American citizens?

  • Sam Stone

    Sharron McPherson commented: “As an attorney, it’s clear to me that Obama is, in fact, a natural born citizen. ”

    See Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

    This case concerned Mrs. Happersett, an original suffragette, who in virtue of the 14th Amendment attempted to register to vote in the State of Missouri, and was refused because she was not a man. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in that year, wrote the majority opinion, in which he stated:

    The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.

    As an attorney you should know better.

  • Sam Stone

    #52 January 24, 2012 at 2:06 am Sharron McPherson commented: “A legitimate question is whether Obama, in fact, is required to respond to such a ridiculous subpoena in the first place. Whatever our feelings about the politics of Obama, let’s be intelligent – please.”

    You should be following your own advice! As an attorney, is the POTUS above the law and not subject to the courts during his presidency?

  • HadEnough

    @Sam Stone……Save your facts. Arguing with these Obama slob knobbing liberal wieners is what has gotten us were we are in the first place….especially when it comes to those in the judicial field….they don’t want to hear the facts…………….they fully support letting this fool get away with so much already….The clown goes around flaunting his total disregards for the laws of this land so why should a liberal attorney believe otherwise……..

  • ellen

    he Minor vs. Happersett decision is NOT a ruling on the meaning of Natural Born Citizen.

    The court explicitly refused to decide whether a person born in the US without reference to the citizenship of the parents may be considered a natural born citizen.

    This ruling does not support the claim that birth in the USA to one citizen-parent is not Natural Born Citizenship. It does not even support the claim that a child born in the USA to TWO foreign parents is not a Natural Born Citizen. It simply is not a ruling. It said that it was not going to rule.

    To be sure, a person born in the USA to two US citizen parents IS a Natural Born Citizen. That is because she or he fulfills all the possible ways of being a Natural Born Citizen. But, although the court said that it was never doubted that someone who fulfilled all the possible ways of being a Natural Born Citizen is a Natural Born Citizen, it never said that all the possible ways were required.

    However, the Wong Kim Ark case, which followed the Minor vs. Happersett decision and hence would have overturned it (IF Minor was a decision, which it wasn’t), IS a decision. It ruled that EVERY child born in the USA is Natural Born (unless she or he is the child of foreign diplomats). What, then, is a Natural Born Citizen? A citizen who was Natural Born, of course. And according the the US Supreme Court in Wong (six to two, one not voting), the meaning of Natural Born comes from the common law and refers to the PLACE of birth.

    Thus all US citizens who were born in the USA are Natural Born Citizens.

    That is why such prominent conservative Senators who are also lawyers as Orren Hatch and Lindsay Graham say that a Natural Born Citizen is simply one who was born in the USA:

    Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said:
    “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.” (December 11, 2008 letter to constituent)

    Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), said:
    “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004

    The Wall Street Journal put it this way:
    “Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning.

    Obama received all 375 Electoral Votes that he won in the general election—despite a campaign by birthers and two-fers to have some of the electors change their votes. Not one of the 375 electors that Obama won thought that he was not a Natural Born Citizen. In addition, Obama was confirmed unanimously by the US Congress—despite a campaign by birthers and two-fers that tried to convince some members of Congress that Obama was not a Natural Born Citizen. And he was sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States. Not even one of the Obama electors thought that Minor vs Happersett was a precedent for two citizen parents. Not even one member of Congress thought it, and the Chief Justice of the USA did not think it, obviously, or he would not have sworn in Obama.

    This meaning of Natural Born Citizen has been followed in dozens of federal court cases. For example:

    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.”
    The parents are both Romanian, the children are Natural Born Citizens.” What makes them Natural Born Citizens? Their birth in the USA.

    And:

    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.”

  • Sam Stone

    In Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875) The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in that year, wrote the majority opinion, in which he stated:

    “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.”

    In their RULING on the case!

    go to United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

    In this case the Justice Gray gave the opinion of the court. On p. 168-9 of the record, He cites approvingly the decision in Minor vs. Happersett:

    At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

    On the basis of the 14th Amendment, however, the majority opinion coined a new definition for “native citizen”, as anyone who was born in the U.S.A., under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Court gave a novel interpretation to jurisdiction, and thus extended citizenship to all born in the country (excepting those born of ambassadors and foreign armies etc.); but it did not extend the meaning of the term “natural born citizen.”

  • Sam Stone

    And thus ellen, we now have a reason to once and for all RULE on the definition of the term.

    Do it now before it is a crisis. And the case will proceed on Thursday morning at 9am.

  • ellen

    It is up to the US Supreme Court to decide for itself whether or not it will take a case. And, as you know, it has turned down every single birther case so far.

    But, assume that it will take this one. If so, you will be terribly, terribly, terribly disappointed because it will rule nine to zero or at worst eight to one that a Natural Born Citizen is simply a US citizen at birth, one who was not naturalized.

    This should be fairly obvious to anyone who has studied a little history. For example, in World War I, American men who registered for the draft were asked whether they were US citizens. Then, if they were, they were asked whether they were naturalized citizens or Natural Born citizens. Notice that there was only two choices: naturalized or natural born. If a Natural Born US citizen referred to the parents of the citizen, there would have to be several options, not just two. There would be naturalized citizens, and native born citizens with one or more foreign parents, and finally Natural Born Citizens. But there were only two categories: naturalized and Natural Born.

    And that turns out to be the way that the AMERICANS (not the Swiss, of course) at the time that the Constitution was written used the term. They always used it to refer to refer to citizenship due to the PLACE of birth, never due to the parents.

    Here is an example of how it was used in 1803, shortly after the Constitution was written.

    “Prior to the adoption of the constitution, the people inhabiting the different states might be divided into two classes: natural born citizens, or those born within the state, and aliens, or such as were born out of it. The first, by their birth-right, became entitled to all the privileges of citizens; the second, were entitled to none, but such as were held out and given by the laws of the respective states prior to their emigration. …St. George Tucker, BLACKSTONE’S COMMENTARIES: WITH NOTES OF REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. (1803)

    As you can see, that refers only to the place of birth, not to the parents.

    And here is how it was used in 1829:

    “Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.”—William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed. (1829)

    There is nothing novel about the meaning of jurisdiction in the Wong Kim Ark case. It means people who are subject to US laws. All people in the USA except for foreign diplomats (and foreign invaders) are subject to US laws. At one time there was a question whether Indians on reservations were subject to US laws, but they were specifically made citizens by special legislation in 1924 or 1925. In addition to the ruling in the Wong Kim Ark case not being novel, it is THE LAW, having been the majority of the US Supreme Court, and an overwhelming majority at that (six to two, one not voting).

    As mentioned earlier, the Minor vs Happersett case is not a decision, since it specifically said that it DID NOT have to decide. That is why not one single member of Congress (and they are mainly lawyers) voted against confirming Obama’s election or stated after the vote that they would have voted against him.

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President….”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

  • Sam Stone

    ellen, I think you are wrong on many facts but that aside, SCOTUS has not yet turned down even one case on this matter. The cases have so far not made it that far. This case will proceed and as all SCOTUS cases go, I will accept it and move on.

    I say it must be decided thats all.

  • ellen

    The US Supreme Court has turned down at least four birther cases.

    You say “it MUST be decided.” Are you saying that the US Supreme Court must accept a case? It has the right not to accept cases. Its rules are that unless four justices want to take a case, it does not take it. There are four conservative justices on the US Supreme Court, but so far they have voted not to take birther cases.

    NOW as to what to accept and “move on.”

    The US Supreme Court has so far not taken a single birther case. Unless and until it takes a birther case what is the law. The law is that there is NO legal question about Obama being a Natural Born US Citizen. The fact that his father was not a US citizen was well known at the time of the election, and the US electorate, the US Electoral College and the US Congress all voted him president despite that fact, and the CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES swore in Obama.

    Obama is President of the United States, and he will deliver the State of the Union Address tonight.

  • Sam Stone

    Name the cases that got that far before getting to the appellate courts! I am not aware that these cases have moved through the system to reach the SCOTUS yet as all have been shut down in the first court of record.

    I say it must be decided. Not it must be taken up by SCOTUS.

    Given all the illegal aliens in this country, how long before one runs for the presidency? Why wait until it becomes an issue where time is of the essence? The definition must be ruled on BEFORE we face it again and not when it is of utmost importance. This case is as good as any and it WILL proceed Thursday morning.

    “US electorate, the US Electoral College and the US Congress all voted him president despite that fact, and the CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES swore in Obama. ”

    All irrelevant to the issue and have no bearing on it.

    Hypothetically, what would become of every piece of legislation and Executive Order signed by a President who was later ruled ineligible to hold the office? Is that a Constitutional crisis we want to face possibly in a time of war or other severe issues?

  • Sam Stone

    Looking around, I see that SCOTUS did refuse to hear a few cases but they were based on Obama’s place of birth, not the US Constitution’s 4 requirements to be President.

    We will see after the Georgia hearing how far it will go.

  • ellen

    RE: “They were based on Obama’s place of birth, not the US Constitution’s 4 requirements to be President.”

    The cases all included both the stupid claims that Obama was not born in Hawaii and the legal theory that two citizen parents are required. And all were turned down. The justices did not even ask Obama’s lawyers to respond to the brief of the other side. It only takes one justice to ask a side to respond to the other, and not one justice in any of the cases did that.

    A justice could have just asked the Obama lawyers to just respond to the two-parent theory, but not one justice did that.

    To be sure after the Atlanta hearing birthers will appeal, and lose, and appeal again, and lose again. That is because the meaning of Natural Born Citizen is well understood, and it refers to citizenship due to the place of birth.

  • ellen

    Re: “Given all the illegal aliens in this country, how long before one runs for the presidency? ”

    Answer: An illegal alien is not eligible to be president. The US-born child of an illegal alien is eligible to be president. Shocking? No. It simply means that it is up to the voters to decide, and if they decide that the child of an illegal alien would make as good a president as the person she or he is running against, then their decision is binding.

    That is because the meaning of Natural Born Citizen simply refers to citizenship at birth, of which by far the overwhelming majority are persons born in the USA. The only kind of a US citizen who is barred from becoming president are naturalized citizens (and those under the age of 35 and who have not resided here for 14 years, of course).

  • ellen

    By the way, seven US presidents had foreign parents, of which only two were under the provisions of the grandfather clause, Jefferson and Jackson (who had TWO foreign parents).

    The others:

    Buchanan
    Chester A. Arthur
    Woodrow Wilson
    Herbert Hoover
    Obama

    Both Buchanan and Arthur had foreign fathers. It is claimed that Arthur hid the fact that his father was born in Ireland and was not naturalized before Arthur was born, but there is no evidence that Arthur hid anything. Same for Buchanan. Some birthers claim that Buchanan’s father must have been naturalized, but there is no evidence of that either.

    Wilson and Hoover’s mothers were foreign citizens. They automatically became US citizens when they married their American husbands under a law that was in effect at the time. But that is NOT the same thing as their being naturalized. Since they did not give up their foreign citizenships, they were still citizens of the countries that they were born in, and they did not have to swear an oath of allegiance to the USA, only marry an American.

  • john

    with obama being a non us citizen, in terms of the constitution, this opens the flood gates for arnold schwartzeneger to run for president if he want to, would be a hell of a lot better off than we are now..

  • john

    addendum to last statement: whats good for one should be good for all…

  • Bill Lindrum

    Am I the only person who watched Obamas grandmother say on live tv that “she was so proud when she watched him being born in KENYA, and now he is the president” Why would his own grandmother say that? He was born in KENYA not anywhere in the US.

  • ellen

    Bill Lindrum said:

    “Am I the only person who watched Obamas grandmother say on live tv that “she was so proud when she watched him being born in KENYA, and now he is the president” Why would his own grandmother say that? He was born in KENYA not anywhere in the US.”

    You are certainly not the only person who has false memories. The first one was that Obama’s grandmother was on television. She wasn’t. The second one was that she said that he was born in Kenya. She didn’t. In fact, the transcript of the tape recorded telephone call shows that she said that he was born in Hawaii, repeatedly. However, the first birther site to use the recording cut off the call just before she said that he was born in Hawaii the first time.

    There is actually another interview with the grandmother, done by the Hartford Courant newspaper, and in it she said that the first that her family had heard of Obama’s birth was in a LETTER FROM HAWAII.

    That, plus the official birth certificate from Hawaii, and the confirmation of the facts on the birth certificate by three Republican officials (and several Democrats) and the notices of Obama’s birth in the Hawaii newspapers (which were not ads; Hawaii newspapers only took birth notices from the government at the time). The Hawaii government sent out birth notices only for births in Hawaii in 1961. And, no, they could not have been fooled by relatives in 1961? Why not? Because whenever there was a claim of a birth outside of a hospital they insisted on a witness statement.

  • http:[email protected] mary H

    what.s wrong with you people. For heavens sake. leave the man alone. he had a golf game to play. He doesn>t have time for a silly court appearance. And what>s up with these ridiculous rules. Go to court just because a judge orders it? I think we all should just ignore the laws and make our own rules like Barry does. works for the democrates.
    The king has spoken , he will say what will be in the constitution. what.s wrong with that? He is lord and king and if you don>t believe me just ask the koolaide drinkers. The sheeple follow him like so many did Jimmy Jones. They drank the koolaide too. Now can you understand why they are brain dead. Loved the reps. words get out of America. I totally agree. The sheeple should start packing, hint. this is America not kenya. You dems are in the wrong country.

  • ellen

    mary H said: “Go to court just because a judge orders it? ”

    But the judge DIDN’T order it. Orly taitz got a blank subpoena form and filled it in. And by doing so she showed how little she knows about Georgia law. You see, the court involved is an ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT, and in Georgia Administrative Law courts do not have the authority to issue subpoenas. Want further proof? Well, perhaps you did not notice that when Obama and other subpoenaed witnesses did not show up (Orly also subpoenaed officials in Hawaii and a sheriff from Arizona) the judge did not mention the fact. You know, if he had really issued an order to appear, the judge would have said something.

    Obama was not born in Kenya. He was born in America, in Hawaii, and every US citizen who was born in the USA is a Natural Born US citizen.

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President….”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

  • Pingback: CRS — Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born … | Best Law Practice Info()