Supreme Court To Review Barack's "Citizenship"

What the @%$$ is intriguity?  I guess you just lost the ability to be literate.

Thankfully, there are some here that realize that this issue isn't here to trash the man. It is brought before the highest court in the land to resolve an important constitutional issue.

ROFLMAO

Thankfully, there are some here that realize that this issue isn't here to trash the man. It is brought before the highest court in the land to resolve an important constitutional issue.

Yes, I'm sure you are grateful thinking you might have been too subtle for someone--anyone--to notice what your issue is.

IF the Supreme Court grants cert, they will review THE CASE to determine that the lower court did or did not behave themselves.  They will not retry the case, they will not address the facts asserted about Senator McCain's and/or P-E Obama's "natural-born" status. 

This has been explained to you more than once--and of course, you could always do the research...

Southern Gent

As a southern gal, I guess you didn't hear that woman at the local Stop and Rob by my house pontificating the end of the world with tears in her eyes, or read the Armageddon laced message boards of my local paper on Nov. 5th.  I wouldn't say that all of the McCain supporters conceded with grace.  And, being the self depreciating people that we are, I don't think we would've rioted or burned Washington had Obama lost.  Upset?  Yes, but we're kind of used to losing elections.  I was beside myself with joy on 11/5.  I couldn't believe that FINALLY someone I voted for won.

There was a spring in my step that night at work despite my No Obamanation co-workers.  I don't live in a trailer either.  But, I've seen one on tv.

Thank you, Pacific.  Hopefully this will end this little debate.

It didn't end anything for me. All that was was 3 links to the same story about some state official saying she "saw" it. I stated before I could care less myself but taking someone's word for it doesn't seem to be the best way to convince people.

Of course state officials aren't bought or lie right ?

No we can count on our state officials to always be truthful and correct.

I just don't understand why he doesn't go on TV with his birth certificate. The networks would give him the air time.

I know it would make everyone happy to hear him say he was born in Hawaii and here it is for public review.  Put it in the hall of Congress for view. All doubters see and behold.

Connie, 

Give up.

He *has* provided his birth certificate for review. You're wrong. You're very, very wrong and you're looking very very silly.

Right now what is needed is that the PE Obama stops the debacle of the DJI. Since he was elected about a 20% is lost, i.e. Getting out of his residence and speak to the American people..

Since he was elected about a 20% is lost,

And about 30% before his election.... so your point is???

Come on Joe, third times a charm they say...

Vanna, I'd like to buy an E please...

int_grity

I rest my case

Vanna, I'd like to buy an E please...

int_grity

Darn you!! That wheel is rigged, I tell you...rigged! ~waits for my parting gifts~

He is a white man.

I know, he's our first white President.

Give me a break, they did the same thing to McCain and he was determined to be natural born. This was going on long before he was elected and doesn't appear to go away any time soon.

McCain was white, and we all know that white men named John can't possibly be a citizen of this Nation. he deserved it.

Deserved what ? Establishing citizenship is part of running for office and he was subject to the same scrutiny Oabam was. The only difference is he cooperated and got it out of the way instead of dragging it out past the election. John McCain is not a horrible man no matter how you try to spin it, and using his race against him is a dishonor to him and his service to this country no matter what your party affiliation.

He is beige.

The only difference is he cooperated and got it out of the way instead of dragging it out past the election.

Actually, he didn't have to "cooperate". Senators. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced a resolution which was supported by Senators Clinton and Obama, and which passed unanimously, expressing the sense of the Senate that Senator McCain was a natural-born citizen, and eligible to run for the Presidency.

You can relax, EJ.  Even if your statement:

...using his race against him is a dishonor to him and his service to this country no matter what your party affiliation.

was actually true (it's not-- being a racist doesn't dishonor the subject of your racist views since they are all in the racist's mind which doesn't effect anyone's honor but the racist's) Mars was engaging in sarcasm, or possibly irony.  Maybe even parody. 

It was actually pretty cute.  Sorry you missed it.  (Nothing is ever that funny to someone you have to explain it to, sad but true.)

I didn't miss it, I found it offensive in it's context. I would appreciate it if you didn't patronize people who find that sort of humor lacking in taste. Of course that's just my opinion that we have to actually respect each others views without belittling them in the process.

Sorry I missed your response, EJ. Let me see--you found her/his humor so lacking in taste that you had to respond as if you hadn't a clue that it was posted humorously?  I don't think I get that.  Now you can be patronizing.

By the way, "Give me a break..." would be considered patronizing, perhaps even belittling, in most circles--so, while I suppose you might appreciate it if someone didn't do it to you, I think its unlikely that it is your opinion that "we" shouldn't belittle each others views, much less respect them.

If its any consolation, I find the stuff you post offensive, too.  I think people should get over the Survivort mentality before posting on a legal matter.  Law requires something a little more rigorous than "I have a remote, I get a vote!"

And the only thing they will review is whether or not the lower court ruling was correct. That is it.

If they uphold the lower court ruling, it's a over. Done. Fini.

If they overturn the lower court ruling, it is sent back to the lower court for trial at that time.

There is a still a very long way to go on this.

And I say your magical sky fairy doesn't exist....  So, my point is, not everyone cares about his church.

I say "God damn, America"

This is exactly who I want for President and First Lady.  This is a chance for someone that has "been on the other side" to take issue with these problems and try to improve the situation.  I say let them try.....they might bring some sensitive issues out into the public arena, but I really don't think they will make anything any worse.  I've seen what the pampered and privileged can do when elected......now I want to see what can be accomplished by someone that actually had to work for their status.

Nobody cares he attended a church that preached racism!  Where all 'white' America is denounced soley on the color of their skin.  If you condemned racism, would you sit and listen to it from your preacher almost half of your life.  Would you give money to and support this same church and priest? 

Sorry folks, but the President Elect is a racist. 

Interesting, don't you think, considering he's both black AND white?  Which half of himself do you think he hates the most?

Nobody cares he attended a church that preached racism!  Where all 'white' America is denounced soley on the color of their skin.

Nope. I care more about the fact that he is delusional enough to go to any church. I don't care how bad that particular church made white people feel. I don't care if that church hated white people, because white people sure hate that church. I call that fair game.

I think it's cute how you cry foul over racism towards white people. Who cares? Whites are just as racist as blacks. Call it even and move on with your life. The best you can do is surround yourself with non-racist people.

Maybe you should move since being white will be made illegal now. Isn't that how it goes?

Dodging the issue with smartass response, typical, Ellen

I grew up in Texas.  I saw and heard racism from every church I stepped into.....but even more so from the christians outside of the weekly services.....it was not uncommon to hear them speak of %^&_)*& (insert your favorite racist remark here) on a regular basis.

Are you an American?

Why would you say that?

You have the right to say it because you live in America.

Atheist, Well, ok if one of those parishiners runs for a Presidency then I wouldn't want a racist for a President so I wouldn't vote for them.  Just because it's done somewhere else, doesn't make it right.

nohandouts.  You are correct....it doesn't make it right.....but based off of my experience (not just in Texas, but also in several other states and countries I have lived in)......I believe it to be common.  Race will continue to be an issue for a long time....but I think it is time to give the other side a chance to improve things.  Fair is fair.

Connie.....who are your questions directed at?

Veronica: Reading your posts, I've come to an understanding. You've announced who you are (Veronica, duh), where you live, what you do, when you do it (not really, but judging by time spent on this board not often), leaving your audience (we, your adoring and rapt readers) to understand why. 

"The next president of The United States of America went to a anit-white, anti-American church for 20 years.  He heard hatred spewed out about whites and America for 20 years." "His wife has spent most of her life being ashamed of America. Only recently did she say she was proud of America for the first time.""I know if my church taught hatred of blacks and  America I wouldn't stay 20 seconds never mind 20 years."

Add to this your obsession with the abortion issue. As a Catholic, do you honestly believe your Lord's righteousness needs assistance from a nation's laws, or you personally ?

So: Why ? You seem victimised, on many fronts. You accuse others of sexism, prejudice, and other things when challenged.  You feel deprived and resentful, and I'm sorry. Life can suck, but you won't change it trying to change what can't be changed.

"Listen to me: It's not your fault."  - Good Will Hunting

I saw and heard racism from every church I stepped into.....but even more so from the christians outside of the weekly services.....it was not uncommon to hear them speak of %^&_)*& (insert your favorite racist remark here) on a regular basis.

I've heard it, too; and every now and then, they'll pepper an "I'm a Christian" into the drivel.  I guess being Christian makes it alright.

Yes, he had a whole lot of spending money.

I take it he can no longer spend that money and has begun to raise more money. So come on people give up the money.

Oh, heck I'm tapped out. I've lost my but in the market and I've lost my job, and I can't get help from anyone because we are all in the same boat.

All those middleclass people who were laid off yesterday and the day before have to make their house payment and buy the fuel oil and the food for their kids. Merry Christmas to us all.

You can thank the Republicans for the "tapped out, losing your butt and losing your job". De-regulation, the gift that keeps on giving pink slips and foreclosure notices.

But don't you dare blame Obama for getting donations from people like me, who were so intent on making sure we got an intelligent president that we were willing to part with a little of our money to support him in this endeavor. At least he wasn't spending it on clothes.

Oh and btw, your post is off-topic. Very cute, though, thank you.

Nov 18 2008
Waiver of right of respondents Federal Election Commission, et al. to respond filed.

This said that the FEC said '@!$%# you Mr Berg, you're an idiot, and we're not wasting our time to respond to your useless @!$%#'.  In a nutshell...

No Frog, the writ is a demand for the Supreme Court to review the decision of the lower court.  Due to the Judiciary Act of 1925, a writ of cert is required in order to reduce workload on the court.

So produce it already.

What is the big deal.

He has to make it a federal case.

What was the name of the hospital?

Who was the doctor?

What time was he born?

Just the simple things.

I'm sure we all know our own birth story and the record to prove it exsits and could be produced.

Golly geah!

Thank you, Sometimes the simplest things we don't dare try to understand. So what does this mean happens next? It gets thrown out or reviewed, it looked to me like both were being dismissed.

Actually, you don't understand it, obviously.  No document is going to have to be produced, at all.  If the SCOTUS does indeed grant this writ, they will review the decision of the lower court.  In this case, the lower court ruled that the plaintiff does not have standing to bring his case, therefor said suit never made it to trial.  The most that could happen is that the court could find that he does have standing and remit the case back to the district court, where it would go to trial, and most likely be tossed again.  But, the fact remains, Berg should not get his writ granted because an ordinary citizen does not have legal standing to challenge the citizenship of another citizen.  If a sitting state AG were to bring these charges, then it could proceed, but not just any Joe Schmoe can do this.

Who can challenge citizenship?

No, Frog Prince, any American cannot challenge citizenship.  That is the entire basis of the whole argument.  The Government, e.g. Attorney General,  is the only entity that can challenge citizenship.  That's called legal standing, and the district court ruled that an ordinary citizen does not have such standing.  So, unless SCOTUS rules differently, that is precedent.

As to #36.9, you can believe whatever you want, but you're wrong, and you should take it upon yourself to not push your falsities as facts.

A writ of cert is NOT a motion to compel document production; and a deadline to respond to the writ of cert is NOT an order compelling document production.  SCOTUS has more important things to do than deal with triffling discovery matters.  SCOTUS will be reviewing the lower court's decision to dismiss the case for lack of standing.  IF SCOTUS determines that Berg had standing to bring forth the lawsuit, that does not equate to an order to produce the birth certificate.  It would simply mean that Berg is a proper party to the litigation.  The lower court could still summarily dismiss the case as being meritless.  As I understand it, merit is not being argued here, just standing.  Those are different things.   

Berg bears the burden of proving that Barack Obama is not a citizen.  He who makes the allegation bears the burden of proof.  However, THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN PRODUCED!  Damn!  Some people are never going to accept it, but it's been produced. 

Is there anyone out there who knows law and doesn't have to swear or use %^$#%^ to pretend swear. You know I would like straightforward answers, I have had a few and Thank you to those of you who responded nicely, but it is real frustrating having an adult conversation with childish remarks interrupting.

My comment was not directed at you in particular. I apologize that I somehow attached to your comment. I was directing the "Please talk like adults" to anybody being foolish.

Anyway, Thank you, although I don't need simple terms. Too many people spout off on Newsvine without true knowledge and I like to avoid that at all costs. If I am unsure I ask, not because I am simple, but because I refuse to live in ignorance and I prefer to be confident in anything I say. That said I really don't think this issue will go far as it looks to have already been denied.

Nov 3 2008
Application (08A391) denied by Justice Souter.

 I don't want to have to get into all the lawyerly jargon because some of it is incomprehensible unless you go to law school.

Please do. I have my doubts that you can.

Americasorphan,

If you are seeking the simple truth, don't listen to Frog Prince.  It really is that simple.  Go back and read my posts.

Frog & Americansorphan. Let me see if I can get put this into simple, plain english.

Berg filed a lawsuit in the Pennsylvania District Court.

The judge ruled that Berg was not allowed to file the lawsuit, because he does not have a reason to. Berg does not have a reason is because he does not suffer any kind of harm to himself. That is what is known as standing, and it he reason the judge in PA tossed out the lawsuit.

Once the Judge's ruling was handed down, Berg filed two pieces of paperwork at the US Supreme Court. The first piece of paperwork was an emergency injunction to stop the counting of the ballots until after everything is resolved. This is what Justice Souter denied. This allowed the counting of the ballots to continue.

The second piece of paperwork is something called a writ of certorari. In "english" that is a certification. What this writ does is asks the Supreme Court to hear why Berg thinks the judge in Pennsylvania made the wrong decision. It also asks the Supreme Court of send the case back to the court in PA to have a hearing. Now what Obama and his lawyers have to do by December 1 is to file their own paperwork saying why they think the judge made the correct decision.

Once the writs are filed, the judges read the arguments and then four of them have to say yes, they want to hear the case. That is what is known as granting the writ. They agree to hear the Berg's argument as to why the case was decided incorrectly by the judge in PA.

Now, for a short lesson on the job of the US Supreme Court. What the Supreme Court does is it hears arguments why the lawyers think the wrong decision was made in a lawsuit, or why the correct decision was made depending on which side of the case the lawyer is on.

The Supreme Court does not hear the case itself.

Now. Was that simple enough for you to understand? Does it need to be simpler?

There will be no case heard at the Supreme Court level. The only thing the Supreme Court does is give an opinion on the way cases were decided earlier. Not on the case itself.

I would suggest you take some time, go to the library, and find some books on the American Government and how the Justice System works. There are some very good ones out there.

Snideness aside, That is exactly what I said without so many words. I should feel comfortable asking a question without being talked down to, it is that simple.

My apologies Americasorphan. I guess my comments were more directed toward Frog, but you got swept in.

Again, I apologize. I didn't mean to make you feel as if I was talking down to you. Please accept my apology?

Not a problem. I never really paid attention to politics or really law before. I am an artist and generally a happy person, kinda doesn't go with politics:)

I can understand that. Unfortunately, I'm a government geek. I don't like politics, but I love the ins and outs of the law and government. If I had the money and time, I would probalby would go to law school and then teach it.

Thanks for understanding.

History Geek, will be going back to school soon. I would love to live in a dusty, musty museum reading books and researching all day. Boring right, Its my drug of choice, enlightenment.

Is there anyone out there who knows law and doesn't have to swear or use %^$#%^ to pretend swear. You know I would like straightforward answers, 

Yes I do know law. I stated the facts above.

You got a straightforward answer. 

You're welcome. 

Thank you

they'll just latch on to something else once this is (likely) disproven

example: OMG he's waving to the audience and someone in that audience looks Muslim - PROOF OBAMA IS A TERORRIST SUPPORTER!!1

Pure HOGWASH.  The GOP is not happy unless it is creating problems for people here at home and overseas.  All you need to do is study the profiles of Scumballs like Nixon, Reagan, Papa Bush and GW Bush.

Dallas - The only thing you got right is that there are two cases.

Both parents must be US citizens and we know that Obam's father was Kenyan under ther British Governement ;So Obam, at birth had dual citizenship...NOT natural born.

Both parents do not have to be US citizens for someone to be born a citizen. Ask the thousands of military brats born to US Soldiers and foreign nationals. There is another piece of paperwork that has to be filed if they are born overseas, but they are definitely US Citizens if the parent's are married, or the mother is a US citizen. Obama was born in Hawai'i. He is an American Citizen by place of birth: a US State. The citizenship of his father has nothing to do with it.

The whole dual citizenship argument is a red herring. He never lost his American Citizenship. The whole British / Kenyan citizenship thing comes from the fact that when Kenya became an independent country, it had a law that said citizenship is granted to the minor offspring of Kenyan citizens. But to keep that citizenship they must claim the citizenship and renounce any other allegiances by the time they turn 21 years of age. After that they automatically lose the Kenyan Citizenship. Since Obama never claimed the privilege of Kenyan Citizenship, it automatically went away.

LadyS- Please correct yourself.  I said both parents must be US Citizens in order for the child to be a "Natural Born Citizen".  See there is a difference between "natural born  citizen" and  "citizen" or having dual citizenship or even multiple citizenships.

Both parent do not have to be US Citizens for someone to be a natural born citizen.

Go take a look at Shawn's post at #3.9. It explains it beautifully.

So, no. I will not correct myself, since I am not incorrect.

Lady- wrong again, if what you say is true why did the Supreme Court accept the case? It would/should have been tossed outon teh merits alone.  It was not... It is going to Conference..

Again 3.9 explain "citizenship" not "Natural born citizen"

Once again a post that could have been constructive has turned into a competition of wit. Everybody looses when conversations fail to be about the facts rather than egos and an innate need to be the absolute authority. I asked about the dockets merely to clarify if there was any merit to the original post, the legal jargon that ensued did not answer the question. All of the posts 10 miles long for the most part confused the issue, short and sweet made sense.

Going to conference means that the justices, or more likely their senior clerks, are going to discuss the case to see if they are going to accept the writ of certorari. It doesn't necessarily mean they are going to take the case.

Also, what Donofrio has submitted, according to his own website is:

... a renewed application for emergency stay of the '08 national election to The Honorable Associate Justice Clarence Thomas on Nov. 14, 2008 by US Postal Express Mail which was delivered at 7:46 AM, Nov. 17, 2008.

This is a stay as to whether or not the results of the election can be certified. He actually wanted to stop the entire national election from happening when he originally filed the lawsuit in New Jersey, which was denied.

The emergency stay is the only thing being looked at in conference. And four of the justices will have to decide if the stay has merit. Justice Souter already denied the emergency stay application, but Donofrio reapplied for an emergency stay to Justice Thomas.

We'll see what happens on December 5th, but I'm not going to hold my breath much.

Lady- wrong again, if what you say is true why did the Supreme Court accept the case

The Supreme Court has NOT accepted the case. It simply is going through the formalities required for disposal of it. 

Well, it's the same case of 8 years reading and listening about GWB from the sore losers.

The shoes changed.

Maybe the aliens that came to Roswell, NM impregnated Obama's mom and that's the real case before the SCOTUS! 

Well, it's the same case of 8 years reading and listening about GWB from the sore losers.

and almost 40% of the GOP, Bush's approval rating is in the 30's.

Well, it's the same case of 8 years reading and listening about GWB from the sore losers.

But after looking back over the record of the last 8 years, we had something to complain about!!!

That is the cutest post I've seen all day... I totally had coffee come out my nose!

Please quit clogging up the vine with stupid.   If you're going to post, at least post things that are partly true.

Lo, ain't it amazing the way some minds work? I mean, Dallas's one paragraph alone could be the basis of many of neuro-psychology theses.

BA, how very blunt. I prefer to call it "cuteness" LOL

Lady, why isn't a lovely lady like yourself my friend? I shall add you immediately!

Yeah Lo,

After refuting these crazy claims all day, I tend to lose patience with those who post the type of disk space wasting crap above...  I thought about working on it so I come off a little nicer, but it's not really worth the effort, as Dallas probably won't be around long enough to care.

Why thank you Lo. :)

I shall answer back. :)

This exact situation has not been addressed before, but generally if the President, or President-Elect, is unable to take the post for whatever reason, it's the Vice President or Vice President-Elect that will be elevated to President.

The order of succession goes President > VP > Speaker of the House > President Pro Tempore of the Senate > Secretary of State > and on through the cabinets according to when they were formed. The oldest cabinet positions first.

The 25th Amendment spells it out (except for the last paragraph which is basically unreadable).

Actually, that's a good question and is addressed further up the thread, somewhere.  If, for some reason, Obama can't fill his position, then it goes to the VP, which is Biden.

dallas...thanks for answering my question in #24...i also followed your link and read the update...it just might get very interesting in the conference room...and what this country doesn't need is another presidential election determined by the supreme court justices...

The link won't work, but I don't need blogtext to explain law to me.  I've got a pretty good grasp on it myself. 

Obam should just step down gracefully, and there will be no Civil unrest.

uh?  He won the election.  Why should he "step down"? 

Well thank goodness it's just your opinion... My opinion is: Dream a little dream, Dallas because that is never going to happen.

ken...i agree he won the popular and electoral votes...i suppose what has to be decided is at birth was he a british citizen or american citizen...and god forbid me saying this is he to be considered half british citizen and half american citizen...at any rate we sure got ourselves in another pickle here with our president...

kakael...

Seriously?  Have you not read any of my posts in this article?

yes justice bajunkie...i've read all of your post... :) ...i'm not referring to bergs case...i'm referring to the donofrio case docket # 08R407...

In reference to the Donofrio case: His legal premise for Obama not being a natural born citizen is extremely shaky at best.

Obama is a natural born citizen since he was born in Hawaii. It does not matter what his father's nationality was at the time of his birth. It does not matter that a Kenyan law that was passed after Kenya became independent from Britain automatically conferred citizenship onto the minor children of Kenyan citizens. It's a Kenyan law, not a US law. Last time I checked, US law had precedence within the USA.

Also, the "privilege" of Kenyan citizenship must be claimed by the time the minor child turns 21, or the privilege of citizenship is revoked. Obama did not claim the citizenship, therefore it's a moot point.

There are plenty of children that are born with dual citizenship that are natural born American Citizens. If this has suddenly changed, then there are millions of American Citizens that are no longer considered "natural born citizens".

Neither Donofrio or Berg have brought one single solitary fact, one shred of evidence, to support their cases.

Are you threatening civil unrest if Obama takes office, Dallas?

Berg's acolytes have promised a 'civil war' and military insurrection?

Want to be part of that? Be my guest. Hint: it doesn't end well for you.

Once again, just because something goes to conference doesn't mean they are taking up the case.  It merely means they are going to review the writ, and chances are this one will be thrown out as well.

Dallas, I did.

I have educated myself on how the USSC works. I have read the link to the website that you have given.

What Donofrio has submitted, according to his own website is:

... a renewed application for emergency stay of the '08 national election to The Honorable Associate Justice Clarence Thomas on Nov. 14, 2008 by US Postal Express Mail which was delivered at 7:46 AM, Nov. 17, 2008.

This is an application for a stay for an election that already occurred. It has already been rejected, pre-election, by the New Jersey Courts.

Also, I have read the basis of Mr. Donofrio's application for the stay of the election directly off of his website, and the reasons he wanted the election to be stopped. He is resting his entire case on the fact that Obama's father was a foreign national. He is ignoring the fact that Obama was born on American Soil, within the state of Hawai'i. That alone makes him a US Citizen, regardless of his father's citizenship.

If (and that is a HUGE if) that is not the case, there are millions of children of American mothers and foreign national fathers that were born here in the United States that are now going to have their natural born citizenship status questioned.

We will just have to wait until December 5th, when the motion for the emergency stay of the election is heard.

I thought he was not born in the US that is why there is a question from the "sore" losers?

They (the sore, sour losers) are ignorant of the US laws.

Obama was born in the US, but even if he was born somewhere else, the fact that he was born to a US citizen, makes him a US citizen. 

- Ludmila

take our freedoms for granite. 

Rock on!

Kim -

That's great - what a great pun! I wish I could click your post up a few times - but they'll only give me one.

I've been keeping track of 'sour losers', 'mute points', and 'our right to bare arms' - but the 'freedoms for granite' is over the top - and your response is priceless.

PS: Like your posts, and those of BAjunkie on this matter - keep it up - it saves me a lot of typing.