Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Petition For Public Release of BHO's Birth Certificate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Babagounj" data-source="post: 726824" data-attributes="member: 12952"><p><a href="http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/22835" target="_blank">http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/22835</a></p><p><strong>Affirming that the world recognizes "birthrights" of the Father (not the mother), bloodline rather than birth place as the foundation for inherited citizenship by birthright</strong></p><p></p><p> <strong>Natural-Born Citizen per Justice Ginsberg?</strong></p><p></p><p> <em>By</em> <em>JB Williams</em> <span style="color: blue">Wednesday, May 5, 2010 </span> In the Supreme Court Case—<a href="http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_99_2071/argument" target="_blank">Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS</a>—Justice Ginsberg made the following statements… affirming that the world recognizes “birthrights” of the Father (not the mother), and bloodline rather than birth place as the foundation for inherited citizenship by birthright… aka, “natural-born citizenship.” </p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-2071.ZS.html" target="_blank">SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES</a></p><p><strong>TUAN ANH NGUYEN etal. <em>v.</em> IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE</strong></p><p><strong>CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT</strong></p><p> No. 99—2071. Argued January 9, 2001—Decided June 11, 2001</p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>From the decision</strong>—”§1409(a)(4) [DNA of the father] represents a reasonable legislative conclusion that the satisfaction of one of several alternatives will suffice to establish the father-child blood link required as a predicate to the child’s acquisition of citizenship.”</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p> Ginsberg is clearly familiar with the Law of Nations, as were the Founding Fathers of the United States, and the birthright of children based upon the father’s bloodline, a matter of “natural law” recognized the world over.</p><p> She would also be familiar with the respected writings of <a href="http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm" target="_blank">Vattel in his 1758 book</a> on the topic of “sovereign citizenship” from which the U.S. Founders borrowed the term “natural-born citizen” as a requirement for the offices of President and Vice President.</p><p> Vattel is VERY clear on the matter - <strong><em>“I say, that, in order to be of the country, </em></strong><strong><em>it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen;</em></strong><strong><em> for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.” - “</em></strong><strong><em>The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children;”</em></strong></p><p> Our Founding Fathers were equally unambiguous - <strong>“No person except a </strong><a href="http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii#section1" target="_blank"><strong>natural born citizen</strong></a><strong>, 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.”</strong></p><p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Also from the decision</strong>—“Finally, even a facially neutral rule would sometimes require fathers to take additional affirmative steps which would not be required of mothers, whose names will be on the birth certificate as a result of their presence at the birth, and who will have the benefit of witnesses to the birth to call upon. Pp. 7—9.”</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Babagounj, post: 726824, member: 12952"] [url]http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/22835[/url] [B]Affirming that the world recognizes "birthrights" of the Father (not the mother), bloodline rather than birth place as the foundation for inherited citizenship by birthright[/B] [B]Natural-Born Citizen per Justice Ginsberg?[/B] [I]By[/I] [I]JB Williams[/I] [COLOR=blue]Wednesday, May 5, 2010 [/COLOR] In the Supreme Court Case—[URL="http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_99_2071/argument"]Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS[/URL]—Justice Ginsberg made the following statements… affirming that the world recognizes “birthrights” of the Father (not the mother), and bloodline rather than birth place as the foundation for inherited citizenship by birthright… aka, “natural-born citizenship.” [URL="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-2071.ZS.html"]SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES[/URL] [B]TUAN ANH NGUYEN etal. [I]v.[/I] IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE[/B] [B]CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT[/B] No. 99—2071. Argued January 9, 2001—Decided June 11, 2001 [INDENT][B]From the decision[/B]—”§1409(a)(4) [DNA of the father] represents a reasonable legislative conclusion that the satisfaction of one of several alternatives will suffice to establish the father-child blood link required as a predicate to the child’s acquisition of citizenship.” [/INDENT] Ginsberg is clearly familiar with the Law of Nations, as were the Founding Fathers of the United States, and the birthright of children based upon the father’s bloodline, a matter of “natural law” recognized the world over. She would also be familiar with the respected writings of [URL="http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm"]Vattel in his 1758 book[/URL] on the topic of “sovereign citizenship” from which the U.S. Founders borrowed the term “natural-born citizen” as a requirement for the offices of President and Vice President. Vattel is VERY clear on the matter - [B][I]“I say, that, in order to be of the country, [/I][/B][B][I]it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen;[/I][/B][B][I] for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.” - “[/I][/B][B][I]The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children;”[/I][/B] Our Founding Fathers were equally unambiguous - [B]“No person except a [/B][URL="http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii#section1"][B]natural born citizen[/B][/URL][B], 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.”[/B] [INDENT][B]Also from the decision[/B]—“Finally, even a facially neutral rule would sometimes require fathers to take additional affirmative steps which would not be required of mothers, whose names will be on the birth certificate as a result of their presence at the birth, and who will have the benefit of witnesses to the birth to call upon. Pp. 7—9.” [/INDENT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Petition For Public Release of BHO's Birth Certificate
Top
