Proofers Dismissed Again
As they did last week, the U.S. Supreme Court today dismissed without comment a case challenging Barack Obama's citizenship based upon a claim that he was not born a U.S. citizen.
A blogger who knows a bit more about the Court than I explains why:This dismissal is unlikely to dampen the hostility of those who oppose Obama based upon various citizenship conspiracies, some of which are represented in still active cases. I'm sticking with the same position that I've held: I think Obama is a citizen, but that he could diffuse a lot of the Proofers if he worked with the State of Hawaii to release of his long-form vault copy birth certificate to a review by independent documentation experts. I'm also just as certain that Obama won't take that step for a multitude of reasons, most of which have to do with his arrogance, and not being somehow unqualified due to the circumstances of his birth. For someone who cultivated a myth of being a post-partisan candidate, he sure seems intent on antagonizing the frazzled of fringe of both ends of the political spectrum. Considering how slowly the Secret Service responded to events in Baghdad, that might not be such a wise idea.
In his appeal, Wrotnowski claimed that because Obama's father was a Kenyan-born British subject, the president-elect does meet the Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural born citizen" of the United States. Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. His mother was a U.S. citizen, born in the United States. Many legal analysts questioned Wrotnowski's argument. "The law has always been understood to be, if you are born here, you're a natural born citizen," said Thomas Goldstein, founder of the Scotusblog.com Web site and a lawyer who has argued numerous cases before the high court. "And that is particularly true in this case, when you have a U.S. citizen parent like Barack Obama's mother."
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:56 PM
Comments
1
Something we may be overlooking. It is possible he does not want to release the long-form birth certificate because he does not know for sure what it says. After all, nobody can remember where they were born (unless you're *really* special). Plus his relatives have been on record saying he was born in Kenya (although I would credit that more to them wanting to take credit for his fame than to actual knowledge of events, i.e. how many "Birthplaces of Jesse James" exist out there)
This is a controversy he can easily ignore, since he is the child of a US citizen, he's legit. (although I still would like to see the certificate)
This is a controversy he can easily ignore, since he is the child of a US citizen, he's legit. (although I still would like to see the certificate)
Posted by: Georg Felis at December 15, 2008 11:22 PM (i5bRG)
2
SCOTUS has now prevented itself from acknowleding the question whether Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” (as distinguished from “citizen”) three times and counting: First before the Nov 4 general election and twice before the Dec 15 vote of the College of Electors. Other cases on the same question are at, or are heading to, SCOTUS. Whether SCOTUS ultimately decides if Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” only after the Electors vote, only after Congress acts on the Electors’ vote, prior to Obama’s inauguration, or only after Obama’s inauguration, SCOTUS will have to decide — or the people and/or the military will. The issue no longer is Obama. The issue is SCOTUS.
Posted by: Ted at December 15, 2008 11:59 PM (5MSHI)
3
Seems to me this could be easily cleared up by simply producing the document in question.
To not do so, and in fact fight every attempt to do so, doesn't speak well of Obama.
To not do so, and in fact fight every attempt to do so, doesn't speak well of Obama.
Posted by: Conservative CBU at December 16, 2008 01:25 AM (M+Vfm)
Posted by: 51773 at December 16, 2008 02:02 AM (fPULd)
Posted by: 51773 at December 16, 2008 02:04 AM (fPULd)
6
My belief is that yes, he is a U.S. citizen and no, he does not wish to establish a precedent of considering himself as being accountable to anyone for anything.
Posted by: Bill G. at December 16, 2008 06:31 AM (d3q4H)
7
I believe that his grandmother believes he was born in Kenya. I would say that that is a more reliable belief.
Posted by: Wayne P at December 16, 2008 10:15 AM (Ndirp)
8
A few months after his inauguration, this challenge will go forth, again his certificate unveiled, and lo and behold, BHO will disclose that he was not a citizen at birth.
The next step will be a call to his supporters to uphold his presidency, creating a divided nation.
Buzz Windrip and his followers will cease control of all vital aspects of the US infrastructure.
I may also warn you that the "run on guns" is not all crazy conservative Republicans either. Windrip's Corpos in-waiting are stocking up too.
The next step will be a call to his supporters to uphold his presidency, creating a divided nation.
Buzz Windrip and his followers will cease control of all vital aspects of the US infrastructure.
I may also warn you that the "run on guns" is not all crazy conservative Republicans either. Windrip's Corpos in-waiting are stocking up too.
Posted by: buzzyw at December 16, 2008 03:09 PM (W5oMo)
9
LEROY JENKINS!!!11!
OK, the HI flunkies swear on a stack of bibles he was born there and are willing to poop out a COLB saying so, BFD. I don't trust their word as far as I can spit, but, ok for argument's sake, let's say He was born in HI and was a natural citizen in 1961. What about the claim he had to be an Indonesian citizen to attend public school there? Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship, raising the problem of renouncing/defaulting on US citizenship IOT attend school in Indonesia. Naturalizing upon return leaves one inelligable for the office of POTUS no? We deserve an answer.
How did he get a passport that would get him into Pakistan when US citizens were restricted from travel there? What is on that passport? We deserve an answer.
Renouncing US citizenship to go nancing about Indonesia, Pakistan and Kenya in a sheet with a towel on your head? Fine, knock yourself out. Want to be POTUS after that? FUCK YOU!! The rules say you can't. US citizenship is one of the most precious goals on this planet and if you want to take it that lightly, well, the risk is you can't be POTUS, DEAL.
What is going to happen in this country two years into his reign when Indonesia or Kenya begin pressuring the US president for military/taxpayer intervention in Africa based on his newly discovered dual citizenship and familial responsibilities to his half brother living in a mud hut on $12.00 a year? You geniuses thought about that yet?
This question should have been lined out months ago and our entire corps of corrupt lazy pols let it get to this point. It all starts with the long-form birth record.
OT, the state of HI does not accept the COLB for land purchase deals for indiginous peoples. Only the long form BC will do because only the long form establishes parental lineage.
I give in that the higher (slightly) percentage is on the side of HI birth legality. I think it likely that somewhere along the line he played loose with the rules and as a result it can be interpreted that he forfeited his natural born US rights. Somewhere in his long form BC, school records or passport trail may lay the answer. It may not. Either way, we deserve to know. It starts with the HI birth certificate.
And this makes me a Troofer? I don't think so.
OK, the HI flunkies swear on a stack of bibles he was born there and are willing to poop out a COLB saying so, BFD. I don't trust their word as far as I can spit, but, ok for argument's sake, let's say He was born in HI and was a natural citizen in 1961. What about the claim he had to be an Indonesian citizen to attend public school there? Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship, raising the problem of renouncing/defaulting on US citizenship IOT attend school in Indonesia. Naturalizing upon return leaves one inelligable for the office of POTUS no? We deserve an answer.
How did he get a passport that would get him into Pakistan when US citizens were restricted from travel there? What is on that passport? We deserve an answer.
Renouncing US citizenship to go nancing about Indonesia, Pakistan and Kenya in a sheet with a towel on your head? Fine, knock yourself out. Want to be POTUS after that? FUCK YOU!! The rules say you can't. US citizenship is one of the most precious goals on this planet and if you want to take it that lightly, well, the risk is you can't be POTUS, DEAL.
What is going to happen in this country two years into his reign when Indonesia or Kenya begin pressuring the US president for military/taxpayer intervention in Africa based on his newly discovered dual citizenship and familial responsibilities to his half brother living in a mud hut on $12.00 a year? You geniuses thought about that yet?
This question should have been lined out months ago and our entire corps of corrupt lazy pols let it get to this point. It all starts with the long-form birth record.
OT, the state of HI does not accept the COLB for land purchase deals for indiginous peoples. Only the long form BC will do because only the long form establishes parental lineage.
I give in that the higher (slightly) percentage is on the side of HI birth legality. I think it likely that somewhere along the line he played loose with the rules and as a result it can be interpreted that he forfeited his natural born US rights. Somewhere in his long form BC, school records or passport trail may lay the answer. It may not. Either way, we deserve to know. It starts with the HI birth certificate.
And this makes me a Troofer? I don't think so.
Posted by: Smokin at December 16, 2008 07:43 PM (BZfBT)
10
Since the Supreme Court has now prevented itself from acknowledging the question of whether Barack H. Obama is or is not an Article II "natural born citizen" based on the Kenyan/British citizenship of Barack Obama's father at the time of his birth (irrespective of whether Barack Obama is deemed a "citizen" born in Hawaii or otherwise) as a prerequisite to qualifying to serve as President of the United States under the Constitution -- the Court having done so three times and counting, first before the Nov 4 general election and twice before the Dec 15 vote of the College of Electors -- it would seem appropriate, if not necessary, for all Executive Branch departments and agencies to secure advance formal advice from the United States Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel as to how to respond to expected inquiries from federal employees who are pledged to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States" as to whether they are governed by laws, regulations, orders and directives issued under Mr. Obama during such periods that said employees, by the weight of existing legal authority and prior to a decision by the Supreme Court, believe in good faith that Mr. Obama is not an Article II "natural born citizen".
Posted by: Ted at December 17, 2008 02:41 AM (5MSHI)
Posted by: Todd at December 17, 2008 06:16 AM (AOW76)
12
"the people and/or the military will."
What??? You hoping for a coup???
Get some perspective, Ted. Barack Obama, natural born US citizen, born to a US citizen mother on US soil, has been duly elected President of the United States.
I think the voters made a big mistake, and I think Obama's an arrogant jerk, but, hey, that's how a democracy works, and now he's going to take office on January 20.
And there will be no military coup to remove him from office.
What??? You hoping for a coup???
Get some perspective, Ted. Barack Obama, natural born US citizen, born to a US citizen mother on US soil, has been duly elected President of the United States.
I think the voters made a big mistake, and I think Obama's an arrogant jerk, but, hey, that's how a democracy works, and now he's going to take office on January 20.
And there will be no military coup to remove him from office.
Posted by: notropis at December 17, 2008 11:16 PM (81VGH)
13
Bob, Obama won't produce this because he feels he doesn't have to answer silly questions that have been clearly adjudicated. This is quite similar to tax protestors who use the same arguments continually in federal court to "prove" why they shouldn't file a 1040. The same arguments are used, are slapped down repeatedly, and the plaintiffs get fined for frivolous lawsuits. The arguments still continue, though.
Posted by: Brad S at December 18, 2008 09:53 AM (X/d4D)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0142 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0113 seconds, 21 records returned.
Page size 14 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.