Quantcast

Bush v. Gore Judge: Your Evidence, Mr. Obama?


Schedules hearing on what precedent White House has on ‘natural born citizen’

A hearing has been scheduled in a Florida court to allow attorneys representing the White House to support their claim that the term “natural born citizen” in the U.S. Constitution means something other than the offspring of two American citizens.

Judge Terry Lewis in Leon County has set a hearing for June 18 to consider arguments from both sides of a challenge to Obama’s name on the 2012 state election ballot.

Lewis is credited with making crucial rulings in the contested 2000 presidential election, when ultimately a Florida vote recount was halted by the U.S. Supreme Court and George W. Bush was declared the winner.

Attorney Larry Klayman’s law firm filed the challenge to Obama’s name on the ballot on behalf of Democrat Michael Voeltz, “a registered member of the Democratic Party, voter, and taxpayer in Broward County, who was an eligible elector for the Florida Primary of Jan. 31, 2012.”




Post Continues on www.wnd.com





Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in 2012 Election, Law, Politics
39 comments on “Bush v. Gore Judge: Your Evidence, Mr. Obama?
  1. joann says:

    This should be an interesting pack of lies, a big job of dancing around the Constitition. It might be worth a trip to FL just to hear the bunch of crap the democrats will present. More than likely the joke of the century. It’s strange that the democrats have their own version of what the Declaration REALLY says and means. They stand ALONE.

    • rightenough says:

      when the dems talk, they are lying

    • TOO INFORMED says:

      What was the name of that law firm? Winkin’, Blinkin’ and Nod?

    • FrankCastle says:

      Democrats, live in their OWN world.. the DREAM WORLD!!

    • Mario says:

      I wonder if the ‘MEDIA’ (MSM) will be hiding in the background or even make mention of this. If it looks like it’s going B.O’s way, they’ll probably make news exclusives. Going the other way, they know & see nothing.

    • riverdweller says:

      RACHEL – Rubio’s parents did not become naturalized citizens until he was 4 years old – so he is not eligible as he is only native born.
      I wish he would just come flat out and admit it instead of denying interest in being V.P.

      Also, the Speaker of the House is 3rd in line for POTUS and so should also be a natural born citizen, which members of the House should consider when they choose a Speaker.

    • Vince Sardo says:

      As I have been stating all along; it really doesn’t matter if Obama was born in the United States and has a valid birth certificate or not, he is still not qualified to be president because both of his parents were not an American Citizen, therefore he is not a Natural Born Citizen. This should have been the subject from the beginning, and maybe the courts would have upheld impeachment proceedings.

      • Ehancock says:

        The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the PLACE of birth, not the parents. The fact that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth, not the parents, has been determined by the US Supreme Court.

          The key ruling is the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case which ruled (six
        to two, one not voting) that every child born in the USA except for the
        children of foreign diplomats is Natural  Born.

  2. Patricia says:

    Please tell me why commentators on TV keep saying Rubio would make a good selection for VP which is the next step to being President, especially if the President died. Rubio’s parents were Cuban. Is everyone deliberately ignoring the Constitution simply because the stupid Democrats did? I have always been proud of our government but now I not only FEAR it, I’m ashamed of it. We no longer have Statesmen working for the betterment of America and protecting the Constitution plus honoring the OATH they swore. We have small minded, ignorant, men and women working to line their own pockets and work for Party so they can stay in power. Fie on all of them.

    • John Dunn says:

      Lately I’ve seen Rubio on quite a few TV shows. From the way he talks I tend to think that he knows he’s not qualified, by way of birth, to hold the office of V.P. ….. that’s why he keeps saying he doesn’t want to talk about it. The other night Hannity was pushing, pushing to get him to at least say he would consider it if asked ! Rubio kept saying I’m not going there ! It really is a shame he’s not qualified because he seems to be one of the good guys !

    • s g says:

      FINALLY, someone who has the same question and idea that I do…I think the Repubs are ignoring Obama’s eligibility due to wanting Rubio.

      While I DO like him I like the constitution more so BOTH are eligible in my opinion, and the Supreme Court cases I have seen uphold that the office must be held by a person whose parents are BOTH citizens

      • Ehancock says:

         The key ruling is the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case which ruled (six to two, one not voting) that every child born in the USA except for the children of foreign diplomats is Natural  Born.

    • budman says:

      Patricia: I agree with what you said but there is one difference between Obama and Rubio and that is Rubio was born in the United States. Obama was born in Kenya without a doubt and he as much confirmed this by stating same yet he continues to lie about his past.
      Consider this. Obama was registered as a foreign exchange student in college which means he wasn’t born in Hawaii and his birth certificate, Social Security Number and Selective Service number are all forgeries. The reason Hawaii will not release any information is because no long form birth certificate exists. A state election official looked for it when Obama was campaigning for President and found no record of his birth in Hawaii other than the certification of birth which can be obtained without being born there. His mother initiated this when she returned from Kenya after his birth there and put an add in the local newspaper.
      Florida has a person in Allen West who would be a strong choice for Vice President and Ms. Rice would also be a good choice to bring over the black and Latino voters. Florida is a critical state and why Rubio is being mentioned but I assure you Allen West would help the Republicans carry the state as he is very popular here and he is marking a mark in the Capitol.

    • Rachel Guess says:

      Actually my understanding is as long as his parents were U.S. citizens at the time of his birth, he would qualify as a natural born citizen. I have asked the same question myself and would like to know if they were or not. If they were not, he would not be eligible to hold the office of Vice President, because the VP has to meet the same eligibility qualifications as the POTUS.

      • Ehancock says:

         Since the meaning of Natural Born Citizen refers to the place of birth, the parents are irrelevant. Rubio’s parents were not US citizens at the time that he was born, neither of them. But that is completely irrelevant because he was born in the USA.

    • riverdweller says:

      Rachel Guess – for some strange reason my reply to you wound up under JOANN who is above Patricia’s orig. post.

  3. big dog says:

    Every one needs to understand this is about the destruction of America and both parties ar involved. They use our race and weakness as humans to divide and conquer us. Liberal, indpendent, labor, big business, choice, gay, straight, fat, black, white, asian, hispanic we are Americans and we are slaves to a bunch of eletist. I get so tired of the phrase you can’t city hall.
    We need to ask ourselfs why we allow this we the people must stand and be counted we must rid ourselfs of slave owners vote them out.

    • 2WarAbnVet says:

      You’ve nailed it Big Dog. Past generations of Americans fought wars to win and to maintain their liberties, and our most costly one to end slavery. The current generation of Americans, as exemplified by the clueless OWS (Obama’s Witless Stooges) parasites, appears all too willing to surrender their freedoms and to submit to state controlled slavery. The problem is that they’re willing cede the freedoms belonging to the rest of us as well.

  4. testament2012 says:

    I thought it was the Supreme Court way back when, that defined what the term natural born meant, since it was proven it was not defined in the Constitution. And if so, how can a lower court rule on the Supreme Courts ruling or findings.

    • FrankCastle says:

      The “Lower Court” only needs to APPLY the Ruling, thus creating a “precedent”… thus now, there IS a “rule” to go by…. OR, the SCOTUS, will be FORCED, to hear it!!! BOTH, are a WIN, for the TRUTH!!!

    • Ehancock says:

       Four state courts and one federal court have ruled that Obama is a Natural Born Citizen. They have ruled because they all decided–as have legal scholars–that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen was defined in the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court decision (six to two, one justice not voting), which ruled that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and includes every child born in the USA (except for the children of foreign diplomats).

  5. Bucs66 says:

    Finally, someone is using the U. S. Constitution and its qualification as a natural born citizen to determine if Obama is eligible to serve as president. This is the ONLY place in the document where the term is used. This has been the principle that should have been cited in all prior cases not place of birth. Place of birth is only relevant after the determination has been made that Obama is in fact a natural born citizen. He is not a natural born citizen according to the definition used by the framers of the constitution, as it was stated “a natural born citizen is a citizen born of parents who are both citizens, either naturalized or by birth.” Obama’s father was never a naturalized citizen and he was not born in America, therefore, he was NEVER eligible to serve as president. This is just another in a long string of examples that could be cited where our leaders have let the American public down!

    • Ellen says:

      The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth, not to the parents. ALL US citizens who were born in the USA are Natural Born Citizens. Only naturalized citizens, none of whom were born in the USA of course, are not Natural Born Citizens.

  6. FrankCastle says:

    “Obama’s briefs [said] it would be an undue burden and expense to have discovery,” Klayman said.

    Why is it, Obama’s Defense ALWAYS has been….

    “its TOO MUCH WORK, to prove anything I claim. So I shouldn’t HAVE to”??

    REALLY??

  7. nexgenesis says:

    The liberal media would love to have Rubio on the ticket. That would put to bed for all practical purposes the issue of eligibiltiy. The Republicans have the best candidate of the pack in Florida and that person is Allen West, a black conservative no nonsense type of guy who would at the very least split the black vote.

  8. Leslie Short says:

    How do we even know that the imposter in the White House is really Barack Obama? Has anyone checked his footprints to the long form? Oh right, they can’t find his long form. So, how do we know that his real name isn’t Ali bin Asswipe?

    • Ellen says:

      Re: “They can’t find the long form.?”

      That is a birther story that is not supported by the facts. Three officials in Hawaii have stated that they saw the original long form in the files. The fact that it exists is also confirmed by the Index Data–which is a public volume that has been available for years, and by the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961.

  9. Txblackjack says:

    thank goodness someone is finally challenging Obama on the right legal argument. Where he was born is NOT the issue. The fact that neither his father nor his stepfather were ever US citizens. Natural born both parents must be US citizens. this legal argument has precedence, beginning with 1875 Minor vs Hasppert. There are others in the early 20th century. Sure hope these lawyers have the ducks in a row…

  10. Harold says:

    I would like to know WHY our supposed reps. have not made Obama prove he is elgible to be president. They are either a bunch of weak kneed cowards, or else they are complicite in allowing him to remain in the white house if he is inelgible. They are the ones who should be on trial for allowing this to continue. I wrote to my congressman from northern Ohio, and guess what, HE never answered me. I have a long and a good memory, he will come up for reelection, (that is if the little wannabe dictator doesn’t do like Adolph H. did in the 1930′s).

  11. Ellen says:

    Re: “Obama was born in Kenya without a doubt…”

    Sure he was. Did you know that only 21 people total came to the USA from Kenya in 1961?

    The notion of Obama’s mother, late in pregnancy, traveling alone (WND has shown that Obama senior was in Hawaii on August 4, 1961) from Hawaii where there are good hospitals, to Kenya, where there was Yellow Fever and bad hospitals, and doing so without any INS record of her leaving the USA or any record of her arriving in Kenya—is absurd. And the fact that there is a birth certificate showing that she gave birth in Kapiolani Hospital in Honolulu makes it even more absurd.

    What are the chances of her doing all that–long, risky and expensive trip plus obtaining proof of birth in Hawaii–and doing it while she and Obama were two of the 21 people who came to the USA from Kenya in 1961?

    No, Obama’s Kenyan grandmother never said that he was born in Kenya. No, the three “Kenyan birth certificates” that are online are all forged (one, the one with the footprint, prepared by a convicted felon who claimed to have traveled to Kenya to get it, but who has refused to show that he went to Kenya–wonder why??).

    Re: “I would like to know WHY our supposed reps. have not made Obama prove he is elgible to be president.”

    Because there is a birth certificate proving that he was born in Hawaii, and there is no proof that he was born anywhere else.

    Re: “a natural born citizen is a citizen born of parents who are both citizens…”

    No, the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth, not the parents. Hence Rubio, Jindal and, yes, Obama–are all Natural Born Citizens.

    “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. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as 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.]

    Moreover, his view was not alone:

    “Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

    “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 on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).

    In fact, birthers and two-fers tried to convince the members of the US Electoral College of the parents requirement, and not one member changed her or his vote out of the belief that two citizen parents required. Not one.

    And four state courts and one federal court have now ruled specifically on Obama’s case that the US Supreme Court defined the meaning of Natural Born Citizen in the Wong Kim Ark case, and that that case said that the meaning comes from the common law and that it includes every citizen born in the USA.

    • Paul says:

      People. The simplest explanation is usually the most correct.
      In Obama, we have a un-qualified person who created a fiction to be ‘cool’ or agreeable to many of His target group of voters. He created the lie that He was born in Kenya. In Islam, as I understand it, the nationality of the mother is not relivant. This allowed Him to be in indonisia for school. As it turned out, this lie got Him into Congress. Had He been vetted during His congressional run, he would have been blown out and never made it in to begin with.

      He is the least qualified Person to have gotten in. He makes Jimmy C look brilliant.(At least Carter served in the US Navy).

      Lets just vote Him out and leave him on the ASH HEAP OF HISTORY. Then we as a country can grow out of this debt hangover he has given all of us.

    • Ellen says:

      THE simplest explanation is indeed likely to be correct. The simplest explanation is that the writer of the blurb that said that Obama was born in Kenya read something about Obama’s father—who was indeed born in Kenya—and that he typed that in haste without checking, and then somehow he failed to send the blurb to Obama to check.

      The fact that the publicity writer wrote something does not mean that Obama wrote it or that Obama checked it.

      However, the important point is that it is STILL stupid to believe that Obama was born in Kenya. Only 21 people came to the USA from Kenya in 1961, and considering the enormous risk of stillbirth for such a trip and of Yellow Fever in Kenya, it is highly unlikely that Obama’s mother was one of them. AND there is a birth certificate showing that Obama was born in Hawaii.

      Re voting him out. That is up to you and to the other hundreds of millions of voters. It is perfectly normal to say that someone is a bad president. That happens all the time. The claim that a president was born in a foreign country is rare. And in this case it is completely stupid. That’s what I am talking about. I might vote for Romney myself. But NOT because of the crazy idea that Obama was born outside of the USA or the absurd legal theory that a Natural Born US citizen requires two citizen parents.

  12. Death walks among us says:

    Geogia challenged him than the judge got on his knees before his god oboma.

  13. Vince Sardo says:

    I think everyone is missing something in our Constitution;
    According to the United States Constitution;
    Article II Section 1
    5 – 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 term; (“at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution”) would indicate that the framers of this document new that at that time it would be almost impossible to find a person that was born to two citizens of the United States. After a period of time it would require that both parents would have to be citizens of the United States.

    I do not believe that the framers of our Constitution would have allowed two or even one foreigner to come to the United States of America and have a child raise him or her to potentially infiltrate our country as a Marxist. To protect America from this possibility the framers of our Constitution intended that after a certain amount of time passed both parents would have to be citizens of the United States.

    Obama’s father was not an American citizen, and for this reason Obama is not qualified to be POTUS even if he was born in Hawaii and has a legitimate birth certificate.

    • Ellen says:

      Your speculation about what the writers of the US Constitution wanted is not the law, and it is not terribly well informed. These are the men who had written: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

      The birther theory about two citizen parents being required is based on the idea that despite writing that phrase, the American leaders at the time that the Constitution was written really thought that the US-born children of one or two foreigners were not as good as the US-born children of US citizens.

      That, of course, might have been true. But it certainly would not be true unless they told us about it. If they had defined a Natural Born Citizen as requiring two US parents (or even one) in any of their writings, that would be the law. But they didn’t.

      And by far the most common use of the term Natural Born at the time came from the common law, and by far most of them were lawyers, and the meaning of Natural Born Citizen in the common law refers to the place of birth, not the parents.

      That is also what the US Supreme Court has ruled in the Wong Kim Ark case, which by the way was after Minor vs Happersett, so it would have overturned Minor vs Happersett (if Minor vs Happersett were really a ruling, which it wasn’t. It is what lawyers call “dicta.”) The Wong Kim Ark case ruled six to two (one not voting) that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and that it includes every child born in the USA except for the children of foreign diplomats.

      “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.]

      In addition to Meese, four state courts and one federal court have now ruled specifically on Obama that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen was defined by the Wong Kim Ark case and that it includes every child born in the USA. In addition, there have been such cases as these:

      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? Simply that she was born in the USA.

  14. Ehancock says:

    The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth, not the parents.

  15. I'mnotstupid says:

    Well in both cases, obama is illegal.   he refuses to show his original birth certificate by microfilm and he also is illegal by one parent being American, and the other a muslim from kenya.  he’s at it again, coniving with fraud to piece together another special made fraudulent birth certificate forced on 1961 Hawaii materials found by one of his thugs or someone who wanted money for his blank Hawaii BC forms.   He just won’t stop lying and forging until he runs out of forms.   his regime says it will be impossible to prove this is a forgery on 1961 material.  He still won’t give us the original.   If we accept anything other than the original dated  microfilm we are stupid fools, and completely brain dead.  Just how many different originals does he have up his sleeve?