Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Georgia case


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Georgia case Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Georgia case - 1/25/2012 4:54:55 AM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xXLithiumXx

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Could they impeach on those grounds?

Im sorta browsing through other political forums and getting ideas.


1. Obama is legal to be President.
2. If he were no longer President, he could not be impeached.  Impeachment is the beginning of an action to remove an officeholder from office.



So....wait...If the "what if" were a real situation, they couldn't impeach him, because he had never held office? SO...he would be what? Stuck being president?


In tazzy's hypothetical situation, she asked about impeaching Obama AFTER his Presidency was over.  My response addressed that.

Your question concerns impeaching him WHILE he's in office.  Totally different.  The answer to that is that Congress can impeach for anything they want.  "High crimes and misdemeanors" is the grounds for impeachment and it's deliberately left vague.  For the sake of argument about a fictional situation, if Obama was found to be ineligible for the office which he's been thoroughly vetted for and declared eligible, then impeachment would be a likely outcome. Please note that impeachment is NOT removal from office, but simply the bringing of charges - removal would be a logical result of impeachment.  Even without removal, Obama's legislation would be called into question and he'd never get new legislation looked at.  As I said earlier, all of his legislation would be attacked by those opposed to it.


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to xXLithiumXx)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Georgia case - 1/25/2012 7:52:23 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		It would traverse up-court, finally go to SCOTUS, if it was upheld as Obama not a natural born citizen AND a citizen of the United States.

Look for that to happen about 2024. 

If it were earlier, then Obama steps down, dealing in  civil and perhaps criminal aftermath, Biden is President, Hillary VP,and who knows who is Secy of State.

 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Georgia case - 1/25/2012 10:30:44 AM   
xXLithiumXx


Posts: 723
Joined: 9/2/2008
From: Hell, Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

It would traverse up-court, finally go to SCOTUS, if it was upheld as Obama not a natural born citizen AND a citizen of the United States.

Look for that to happen about 2024. 



 



I do not understand what any of that means?

_____________________________

If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends?

Ideas don't stay in some minds very long because they don't like solitary confinement


You have to believe in yourself. -Tsun Tzu-

Resident Malkavian.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Georgia case - 1/25/2012 10:39:08 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		lets say georgia found that obama is not a citizen of the us, nor a natural born citizen.  It would go to a state appellate court, possibly state supreme court on a fast track.  Maybe even right to the US Supreme court.  (real doubtful, given their alacrity in ruling on this aforetimes).

At the point of the US Supreme court decision (in the negative for) Obama would then be found ineligible to be President (and civil lawsuits would commence fast and furiously against him), and the next in line is the Vice President, who would become president.  Who would he nod as his Vice President?  I think Hillary Clinton, (thats my take in this farsical bit of what if) and then the Secretary of State position would need to be filled, and I have no idea who would be tapped for that.

 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to xXLithiumXx)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 12:14:30 AM   
blacksword404


Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Lets take the supposition that he is lying. That he is found to have been not a natural citizen.

Play what if...

What happens?


Then everyone who ever opposed any Obama bills (think health care) launch furious suits to overturn those laws since his Presidency was invalid.  They likely will all be denied.  (Think of a sports game.  No matter how many wrong calls the refs made, once it's over, it's over.)

The challenges will get appealed to the SCOTUS, which will refuse to hear them, affirming the decisions at the state SC level.



The way I se it is if he is not natural born it would invalidate everything he put his signature on. Basicly the same as if a person was falsely taking on another's identity. Every legal document that person signed is invalid and unenforceable. In the case of the president that would include all bills and treaties.

Even if its true that he is not natural born, it doesn't matter to me. Not because I support him. I hope he doesn't get another term. But the country couldn't take the turmoil that would come about both in the country and internationally. Too many unseen repercussions to even imagine.



_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 12:17:23 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Even if its true that he is not natural born, it doesn't matter to me. Not because I support him. I hope he doesn't get another term. But the country couldn't take the turmoil that would come about both in the country and internationally. Too many unseen repercussions to even imagine.


Its a moot point as he was born in Hawaii... but yes, I agree. I would love someone to try and get back the Tarp money...

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 12:21:59 AM   
blacksword404


Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Even if its true that he is not natural born, it doesn't matter to me. Not because I support him. I hope he doesn't get another term. But the country couldn't take the turmoil that would come about both in the country and internationally. Too many unseen repercussions to even imagine.


Its a moot point as he was born in Hawaii... but yes, I agree. I would love someone to try and get back the Tarp money...


Yeah good luck with that.

From what I have seen the problem is that part of the requirements for being natural born is that both parents must be citizens at the time of birth. His father never was an american citizen. He was either kenyan or British.

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 6:14:59 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Even if its true that he is not natural born, it doesn't matter to me. Not because I support him. I hope he doesn't get another term. But the country couldn't take the turmoil that would come about both in the country and internationally. Too many unseen repercussions to even imagine.


Its a moot point as he was born in Hawaii... but yes, I agree. I would love someone to try and get back the Tarp money...


Yeah good luck with that.

From what I have seen the problem is that part of the requirements for being natural born is that both parents must be citizens at the time of birth. His father never was an american citizen. He was either kenyan or British.

Then how is it someone born in the US to two illegal imagrants is granted US citicenship?

I think the offencive term of the week is "anchor baby".

The patheticons are trying to change the US constitution.......... over anchor babies.

You may have read about it.

You never read anywhere tho that US citizebship requires both parents be citizens also.You`re imagining that.

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 1/26/2012 6:15:43 AM >

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 6:24:04 AM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

From what I have seen the problem is that part of the requirements for being natural born is that both parents must be citizens at the time of birth. His father never was an american citizen. He was either kenyan or British.


That only comes into play if one is born outside the US. Hawaii WAS part of the US at the time of President Obama's birth.

See Tazzy's post below for details.








< Message edited by kalikshama -- 1/26/2012 6:26:24 AM >

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 6:24:04 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

From what I have seen the problem is that part of the requirements for being natural born is that both parents must be citizens at the time of birth. His father never was an american citizen. He was either kenyan or British.


Because that is not the requirement. And you fall into the trap that many of the birthers fall into.

The rules for citizenship when born abroad for the time line that Obama was born into...

What are the rules for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986?

Again, children born abroad to two US citizen parents were US citizens at birth, as long as one of the parents resided in the US at some point before the birth of the child.

When one parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national, the US citizen parent must have resided in the US for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child, with five of the years after the age of 14. An exception for people serving in the military was created by considering time spent outside the US on military duty as time spent in the US.

While there were initially rules regarding what the child must do to retain citizenship, amendments since 1952 have eliminated these requirements.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother were US citizens if the mother was resident in the US for a period of one year prior to the birth of the child. Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen father acquired US citizenship only if legitimated before turning 21.

http://www.visalaw.com/05jan1/2jan105.html

But, since he was born in Hawaii.....

quote:

Then how is it someone born in the US to two illegal imagrants is granted US citicenship?


Because that child was born on US soil. The US used both ways to grant citizenship.

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 1/26/2012 6:25:13 AM >

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 6:25:11 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline 		Actually, TG, there are three hearings scheduled to commence and proceed sequentially as I write this.

Contrary to some opinions posted earlier, the term "natural born citizen" has never been defined by a federal court. Minor v. Hapersett alludes to competing definitions, but that's about it.
No one can say with certainty what SCOTUS might say it means.
We do know that it cannot mean the same thing as "citizen". (Marbury v. Madison: "No phrase in the Constitution can be presumed to be without effect" That quote is from memory, but it's close).
The only man who defined the phrase before the writing of the Constitution (and possibly the man who coined the term) was M. de Vattell, in Law of Nations. Several of the Founding Fathers have known to have studied this tome and referenced it.
Vattell said a NBC had to meet 4 distinct criteria:
1. Mother a citizen at the time of the birth of the NBC.
2. Father a citizen at the time of the birth of the NBC.
3. Born in-country.
4. Not beholden to any foreign power at the time of his birth.

Note that Obama presumably meets 2 of those, definitely fails one, and may fail another (#4. He says in his book that he was a British subject at the time of his birth; but again.... SCOTUS has not opined, so no one knows.

Note also that Marco Rubio, junior Sen from Fla and a seeming dream pick for VP, definitely fails two criteria (his parents became naturalized citizens some years after he was born), and possibly has a weaker claim on meeting #4 than Obamao (I assume Rubio was a dual citizen at birth).

As to what would happen if SCOTUS ruled Obamao ineligible, again, no one knows. They could, I suppose, invalidate everything he signed as President. They could, I suppose, leave it to Congress to straighten out.

My position has always been that SCOTUS should hear one of these cases (there is some small reason to believe that at least Scalia is open to the idea) and settle the matter, now and for future generations. From the viewpoint of an Obamao supporter... now might be the friendliest hearing Obamao would get...

Many will attack the above. None will produce a different definition available to the Founding Fathers prior to the writing of the Constitution. None will produce a definition from any US federal court, much less SCOTUS, of "natural born citizen".

The beat goes on until SCOTUS defines the term.

Selah.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 6:30:31 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Note that Obama presumably meets 2 of those, definitely fails one, and may fail another (#4. He says in his book that he was a British subject at the time of his birth; but again.... SCOTUS has not opined, so no one knows.


I was with you until this point. The rules are quite spelled out, as I posted above this. And what if the mother is unwed? As far as being beholden to another country, just because citizenship is conferred at the age of birth doesnt mean it lasts... and in Obama's case, it did not. He was never beholden to the British Empire.

As far as SCOTUS defining the term... I dont believe they ever will.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 7:27:16 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

He was never beholden to the British Empire.


You posit that someone born a British subject is not beholden to England.
England and, more importantly, SCOTUS, might hold otherwise.

As far as the question you asked regarding male parentage- again no one knows; but it does not seem unreasonable to me to think Vattel and the Founding Fathers might not have held bastards to be eligible for NBC status.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 7:31:10 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		This is quite simple.

Has there ever been a law including a definition of "natural born citizen"? No. Then common law governs and common law works by the way a term is generally understood and NBC is commonly understood to mean born in the US period.

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 7:41:24 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

Contrary to some opinions posted earlier, the term "natural born citizen" has never been defined by a federal court. Minor v. Hapersett alludes to competing definitions, but that's about it.
No one can say with certainty what SCOTUS might say it means.
We do know that it cannot mean the same thing as "citizen". (Marbury v. Madison: "No phrase in the Constitution can be presumed to be without effect" That quote is from memory, but it's close).
The only man who defined the phrase before the writing of the Constitution (and possibly the man who coined the term) was M. de Vattell, in Law of Nations. Several of the Founding Fathers have known to have studied this tome and referenced it.
Vattell said a NBC had to meet 4 distinct criteria:
1. Mother a citizen at the time of the birth of the NBC.
2. Father a citizen at the time of the birth of the NBC.
3. Born in-country.
4. Not beholden to any foreign power at the time of his birth.

Note that Obama presumably meets 2 of those, definitely fails one, and may fail another (#4. He says in his book that he was a British subject at the time of his birth; but again.... SCOTUS has not opined, so no one knows.



I don't know who said that the term had been defined earlier in this thread, nevertheless, I know, as does most of europe what natural born meant at the time it was written, and I am astonished that nobody has mentioned it.  

And Vattell would have the definition wrong, at two and four.

number four would take out everybody up to about van Buren or Harrison.

here is a hint, the only reason that Alexander Hamilton could not become a president of the united states under that language was because his mother was not a citizen of the US.

need more hints?  ask an englishman, they are thought to be of polite society. 

Who knows what scotus would rule?  I dont think they will touch it, frankly... 


< Message edited by mnottertail -- 1/26/2012 7:43:06 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 7:48:06 AM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline 		A constitutional crisis the likes of which we have never seen happens. Every single law he has signed is called into question. I suppose they would have to be re signed by the next constitutionally elected president, or vetoed, or pocket vetoed. The Feds spend the next 20 years digging out from the rubble.
Good thing it ain't gonna happen
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Lets take the supposition that he is lying. That he is found to have been not a natural citizen.

Play what if...

What happens?


_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 7:51:08 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Ah, but the next constitutionally elected president would be Biden if we are talking now, or sometime in Obamas next term. 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 8:00:59 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

here is a hint, the only reason that Alexander Hamilton could not become a president of the united states under that language was because his mother was not a citizen of the US.


Here is a better hint: read the Constitution.

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

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 8:05:03 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

here is a hint, the only reason that Alexander Hamilton could not become a president of the united states under that language was because his mother was not a citizen of the US.


Here is a better hint: read the Constitution.

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



Food for thought.........

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Georgia case - 1/26/2012 8:05:11 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline 		Actually, the Congressional Research Service based the bulk of their finding on the idea of English common law.

They erred on several fronts, imo, including the simplest.

"citizen" and "natural born citizen" do not and cannot mean the same thing in the Constitution, even if they do so elsewhere.

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Georgia case Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109