(Supreme Court) Justices reject Obama citizenship challenge

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has again cast aside an appeal that raised doubts about President Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship, a grass-roots legal issue that has gained little legal or political footing, but continues to persist in the courts.

The justices without comment Monday rejected a challenge from Charles Kerchner Jr., a Pennsylvania man who sought a trial in federal court forcing the president to produce documents regarding his birth and citizenship.

Kerchner's attorney, Mario Apuzzo, had argued in a petition with the Supreme Court that Obama did not fit the definition of a "natural-born citizen" required for the nation's highest office, as defined by Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.

That clause states, "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."

Kerchner, a retired military officer who describes himself on his website as a "genetic genealogy pioneer," argues the framers of the 1789 document intended a "natural-born" citizen to mean someone born in the U.S. to parents who were both American citizens.

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/29/justices-reject-obama-citizenship-challenge/

Kerchner, a retired military officer who describes himself on his website as a "genetic genealogy pioneer," argues the framers of the 1789 document intended a "natural-born" citizen to mean someone born in the U.S. to parents who were both American citizens.

:D

:hi:

especially them wigs

"Teabaggers--- racists in disguise"

"or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,"

however this was just an aside, I am happy that Obama gets to stay now! :sarcasm:

But technically there is, or was :), two ways to be eligble. Natural born _or_ citizen at the time of the Declaration. The founding fathers would always qualify by the latter, regardless of what constitutes a natural born citizen. They were smart that way. :)

" Kerchner, a retired military officer who describes himself on his website as a "genetic genealogy pioneer," argues the framers of the 1789 document intended a "natural-born" citizen to mean someone born in the U.S. to parents who were both American citizens."

"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citzen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President."

So, while the doofus who brought this suit is off his meds in thinking that there is anything in the Constitution to suggest that the framers intended to limit "natural born" citizens to individuals who parents were both citizens themselves, the argument that the doofus' claims would mean the founding fathers couldn't be president isn't a particularly good argument since the founding fathers actually thought about that question and dealt with it on the face of the Constitution.

Before making an argument based on the Constitution, it always pays to take a look at the Constitution.

I'm not arguing about what the constitution is saying, I am making fun of Kerchner. I'm not arguing that he's right. :shrug:

What if my great-grandfather were illegal? Then that would make my grandfather illegal which would make my dad illegal which would make ME illegal even though I am a fourth-generation American??????
So if you could go back and find a single ancestor for whom you could not prove citizenship, then that would invalidate all their progeny. Boy this could be quite a witch hunt!

So if your great-grandfather was a legal immigrant (but not yet a citizen), then your grandfather wouldn't be a citizen, or your father, or you.

his grandfather would be because he was born here Re 14th amendment.

I guess my citizenship is above question my 7g grandfather arrived at Jamestown in 1698 and promptly went to the hills of WV(no am not inbred either, maybe related to myself) we have our records or rather gramma does. On one side my moms folks go pretty far back too as they are part Powhatan I can trace about 4 lines back to the Powhatan tribe. I was born on Chanute AFB and have my berf cert to prove it. They show up in all the census(s?) since they were started in 1790.

I find this stuff about Barrack Obamas birth cert to be utter nonsense.

I am being snarky, but the info is true.

about the parents have to be citizens. What pdefalla said is precisely the first thing that came to my mind. One could carry that one more step backwards right back to 1492 under this "logic" about the parents. It would have invalidated JFK's Presidency, since those folks came over from Ireland at some point several generations back. Nixon was, I believe, a second-generation immigrant, so his Presidency would have been on the short list to be ... un-done, I guess?

Which brings me to the second question: what in the hell is the end game, the remedy (under the law) if this guy had actually somehow won? The Supreme Court cannot force Congress to impeach someone, nor do they have the power to remove the President from office once the Chief Justice has sworn the President in with the Oath.



It appears that this litigant is not much of a chess player.

This whole citizenship business is bullshit.
Obama was born in Hawaii, which the last time I checked, was US territory.
That this crap continues is bat shit crazy.

:sarcasm:

:rofl:

by extension, one might question his citizenship as well. Yeah, his father was an admiral, don't know much about his mother though...

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

of an American born mother. Pretty well fits in the framework of the Constitution.

And it was also a state when Obama was born in a Honolulu hospital in 1961. Hawaii was granted statehood in 1959.

Hawaii like Alabama or Kentucky is US territory.

:hi:

But US territories (Guam, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Island etc.) are not states. Actually every state was once a territory before they were granted statehood.

John McCain was entitled to run as well. Obama was born in the State of Hawaii. A US Citizen has the right to run for the Presidency as long as he is a natural born citizen. Doesn't matter if it is a territory or state.

:thumbsup:

...along with thousands of others.

You can file anything with the Supreme Court, and it will usually get the same treatment.

These birthers trump up ordinary perfunctory procedures, as if they had some kind of significance.

I got all excited, hoping Orly was involved in this somehow but a Google News search proved futile. She has been a great source of amusement to me.

"The communist Nazi Supreme Court promotes a Muslim terrorist president!"

Peace,
Tex Shelters

The majority of morons believe otherwise. Don't tread on their rights to be idiots! The majority has spoken, and if they say he is a foreigner Muslim it is true. :sarcasm:

They're all lefty pinko commies!

hoping one of them peruses this as they scan DU for "Talking Points"...:eyes:

I'm surprised Alito, Thomas and Scalia didn't jump on the bait, maybe the laughter from the other judges intimidated them...:D

can anyone imagine what kind of lunatic would send them $1, much less $1000...:rofl:

"A Sampling of Some Quotes about the U.S. Constitution from Histsory"

What a moran!

:eyes:

'em down quietly.

jumping over the moon. I am in shock.

or in the interest of trying to make a name for themselves. :crazy:





GOP JOBS PLAN

I understand that the courts refuse to hear these suits because the question of qualifications is a political question - and I could be wrong, I kinda tned this out.

Is there any recourse if a non-citizen is elected to high office?

>Is there any recourse if a non-citizen is elected to high office?

Yes. In the case of the President, it is grounds for impeachment. If you can prove it to the satisfaction of a majority in Congress, you can remove a sitting President. This would presumably require a valid argument and acceptable, relevant evidence to support that argument. So far no birther has produced a valid argument -- so the fact that they haven't produced a shred of evidence doesn't enter into it.

I knew it. Thanks.

Fucking bullshit. It's the 21st century and some of us are still acting like it's the 19th.

Jefferson's mother was born in England
Jackson's mother was born in Ireland
Buchanan's father was born in Ireland
Arthur's father was born in Ireland
Wilson's mother was born in England
Hoover's mother was born in Canada

Were they born in the US?

In fact, they didn't even have to be citizens. The founding fathers recognized that the natural citizen requirement wouldn't work for those who were born before the US came into being, so they wrote into the Constitution a provision that, in the case of those who were around at the time the Constitution was adopted, it was only necessary that they be a citizen, not a natural born citizen.

and I didn't google where his parents were born. My question was just out of curiosity and the post by pinto upthread made me wonder about who is acceptable to the crazy people on the right...

:sarcasm:

Please: just repeating what I have been hearing for 3 years on Fox News.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

But suppose "Ahnold" was about to run for POTUS. Can you imagine the fantastic arguments made about a "true patriot" deserving to be a citizen in full so we could receive the benefit of his ability and his vision? The same clowns who trot out the flag to defend their racism would flock to this noble calling...the divine Right selling us the "Divine Right" of the rich to rule.

You think the repubs like Arnold these days? Where have you been?

Genetic geneaology indeed. How much do you want to bet that asshole wouldn't fit his own definition of natural-born citizen?

As a vet myself, it's genuinely painful. I served under Bush, I didn't like him too much but I didn't call him Hitler; he was my commander in chief and still afforded that basic respect from me. Why some people can be such sore losers that they create insipid lawsuits built off fairytales like this is immature enough, but for a retired vet to do it...I'm disgusted.

This man clearly was used to getting respect and not giving it. A classic call-sign of the kind of officer nobody wants to serve under. Very few people make it to retirement with that attitude. It's a shame that one of the few who did pulls something like this. Deep down I want very hard to think he truly believes he;s doing the right thing, that he truly believes our President is foreign born and not a citizen....but I don't think I've ever met an officer capable of being that stupid. They do want a college degree from you to earn your butter bar, after all.

If the parents had to be citizens before they became president, then George Washington, Madison, Jefferson, etc. could not have been president since their parents weren't citizens.

Anotheer word for Nazi.