On January 20, a Georgia Administrative Law Judge refused to block a subpoena, which has been served on President Obama and which requires him to appear in Georgia for a hearing on whether he is eligible to have his name on the Democratic presidential primary. See this story.
The decision could be appealed, but Obama is also free to withdraw his name from the Georgia Democratic presidential primary. No other person is on the ballot in that primary. Here is the one-page order. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for the link.
I am glad you correctly reported it, unlike the Associated Press, which has erroneously reported that denying a motion to quash a subpoena is the same thing as ordering compliance with it. A subpoena is not a court order, but only a demand by an attorney. If its recipient refuses to comply, only then will the court issue an order demanding compliance.
The reason that Judge Malihi (properly) denied the motion to quash is that it failed to cite adequate legal authority to justify quashing the subpoena. I trust that the otherwise competent attorney handling the case will not make such a mistake in the future.
Pingback: Orly Taitz Wins! Obama Subpoenaed Over Citizenship! |
NBC = AT BIRTH allegiance to a nation-state regime.
naturalization = change in allegiance after birth.
place of birth means ZERO — nation-state status of father controls
— a BIG deal in the 1700s with the increasing populations in the nation-states in Europe — i.e. to have larger armies and navies for war purposes composed of *loyal* subjects (aka commoners, serfs, peons, cannon fodder, etc.)
Sorry but you’re wrong. The “nation-state status of the father” not only does NOT control, it is entirely irrelevant. We’re not living in the 1700s. Birth on US soil = natural born US citizenship. Case is closed.
When did his father become a naturalized US Citizen?
Obama was born one generation too early to be a US President.
He was native born a US Citizen, he can vote, serve on juries, be drafted into the US military, be a US Senator, BUT by one generation he cannot be a US President, per the US Constitution.
where the
(Land)+(Father)+(Mother) = (Child)
(USA)+(US CITIZEN)+(US CITIZEN)=US NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
US Citizenship by Birth Matrix
http://www.scribd.com/doc/78812824/US-Citizenship-Birth-Matrix-2012
Jesus people give it up already you look like fools.
Carl Swensson
CBS led with this last night at 11
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/16567672/ga-judge-orders-president-to-appear
This is the US of A, not some foreign country that has castes or nobility.
The only thing that can be inherited from one’s father is property and it is equally inherited from one’s mother.
I hope Judge Mahili rules on natural born citizenship so that along with Ankeny, you dumb birthers might finally get a clue.
#8
Thank you for the encouragement.
proudly
/s/
aka “dumb birther”
You bet if I was accused of not being an American citizen my response would be–just wait a second and I will bring you the proof. Where there is smoke there is fire. I must admit Soros and the terrorist have done an excellent job of covering their tracks but the truth will come out one day.
I understand some might desire the eligibility for US President might be open to include a native born child of at least one US Citizen, as that might affect you or a relative’s eligibility. However you must also be open to the idea of how and why our founding fathers wanted to restrict eligibility for US President, to a native born of US citizens. If you study the framework of our government system, the US Constitution, it was ratified on September 17, 1787, and all persons alive in the thirteen British colonies were converted into the “original US Citizens”, who were eligible to become US Presidents.
After September 17, 1787, the path to US citizenship is by naturalization or birth. All new citizens born after September 17, 1787, were born in a location, of a man and a woman, who were a combination of nationalities and immigration status, which brought various laws and treaties into play, to sort out there situation.
All children born in the USA after September 17, 1787, were “native born children”, and all “native born children of two citizens”, were the “natural born citizens” who could be eligible to become US Presidents. There has never been a different class of citizens, in the USA, but there has always been an orderly system of citizens who were eligible for service to the nation, but with a designed limitation on access to the Presidency. The fact is, most folks grew up and didn’t pay attention to how it worked, but they assumed it worked somehow.
BTW — The 14th Amendment did not amend Article 2 Section 1 of the US Constitution.
See the US Citizenship by Birth Matrix at
http://www.scribd.com/doc/78812824/US-Citizenship-Birth-Matrix-2012
Analyzing the possible CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH combinations, and immigration status, where the
(Land)+(Father)+(Mother) = (Child) the logical possibilities are:
13.(USA)+(NONIMMIGRANT ALIEN)+(US CITIZEN)=(US/ALIEN) US BORN DUAL US CITIZEN/ALIEN CITIZEN
14.(USA)+(US CITIZEN)+(US CITIZEN)=US NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
Move to Europe or some other place where one’s parentage matters, borderrat.
This is the US and we don’t cotton to nobility and such.
In the US, a natural born citizen is one who was born a citizen. Period.
All of your yammering isn’t going to change that.
#12
Thank you yet again.
14th Amdt time = TOTAL male dominance — in connection with *AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof*. See the 1866 U.S.A. Senate debates on the added first sentence in 14th Amdt, Sec.1 – written to over-rule the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford 1857 case.
Sorry — any females on this list.
Sorry — LEGAL foreign folks in the U.S.A. (via visas, passports, etc.) are NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.A. regime regarding any foreign kids physically born in the U.S.A.
What if a young very pregnant Queen of England has a premature birth in the White House ??? Is such kid a U.S.A. NBC ??? Yeah. Sure. Same for ALL women having foreign nation-state husbands/kid fathers.
ILLEGAL foreign folks in the U.S.A. are ENEMY invaders — armed or unarmed — to be killed or captured – NO different than the Japanese Navy folks who attacked Pearl Harbor on 7 Dec 1941 or who attacked and occupied various U.S.A. areas during World War II — Phillipine Is., Guam Is, Wake Is, etc.
In some places the Japanese military brought their sex slave Chinese/Korean women to such occupied U.S.A. areas – some gave birth in such occupied U.S.A. areas. Were such kids NBC of the U.S.A. ??? Yeah. Sure.
—-
American Indian tribe folks were deemed *internal* foreign folks for many purposes — see the many early U.S.A. TREATIES with various American Indian tribes — and were NOT *subject to the jurisdiction* of the U.S.A. regime for 14th Amdt, Sec. 1 birth/citizenship purposes.
Surviving American Indians after the genocide on them from 1607 to about 1890 had Acts of Congress to naturalize them in circa 1924 and 1940 to becoming U.S.A. naturalized citizens — with their children being NBC.
SCOTUS will clean up its own EVIL citizen (natural born and naturalized) – alien mess that IT has created in various BAD RESEARCH MORON opinions.
See Plessy v. Ferguson 1896 OVER-RULED in Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954.
See Erie Railroad in 1938 — overruling a mere about 98 years of SCORES of cases regarding UN-constitutional ideas about some fictional *federal common law*.
—–
ONE guess what happens to a U.S.A. citizen who goes ILLEGALLY into nations like Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, etc. — INSTANT capture and thrown in jail if not shot.
There are too many juvenile constitutional law MORONS on this list to count.
A bit more –
19 Apr 1775 — Day 1 of the American Revolutionary War in Mass. — deemed the day of the END of Mass folks having ANY ALLEGIANCE to the Brit regime.
Some other States declared their independence (becoming independent sovereign NATION-STATES) in 1775-1776 BEFORE 4 July 1776.
ALL of the new States had ALLEGIANCE oaths for adults (and their children) to the new State regimes
— with all sorts of attainers and purges of Brit royalists / spies / traitors in 1775-1783 — as tough as anything in World War II.
ALL of the new States had their different citizenship and naturalization laws at different dates from 1775 to 1789 – some retroactive to their independence dates or 4 July 1776.
The loyal State citizens became loyal U.S.A. citizens on 4 March 1789 — day 1 of the new U.S.A. regime via the 1787 Const — CREATED by the first 9 ratifying States — see Art. VII.
See the UNIFORM naturalization clause in Art. I, Sec. 8 to end potential State law chaos on the subject.
See the 1790 U.S.A. Naturalization Act — first of many on the subject — used by many ancestors of the folks on this list who got on a boat and went to the U.S.A., took up residence in a State/Territory for a number of years and then took the oath of ALLEGIANCE to the U.S.A. Constitution and then got their naturalization document certified by a U.S.A. Judge/Court Clerk — with their kids born AFTER such naturalization event being NBC.
Thus – 1775/1776 to 1789 loyal State citizens.
1789 U.S.A. regime citizens AND State citizens.
Even after 4 Mar 1789 the States were able to define who was a State citizen (causing some legal chaos) — up to 14th Amdt, Sec. 1 in 1868.
Still some minor fictional chaos about the *wherein they reside* in 14th Amdt, Sec. 1 — i.e. for U.S.A. miitary folks overseas for long times defending the Const. against potential / actual enemy regimes.
NBC = ALLEGIANCE at birth.
NO folks having ANY foreign allegiance connection (via a foreign nation father) allowed to be a U.S.A. President — due to the Prez being CIC of the military.
Again – a BIG deal in the late 1700s — all sorts of folks claiming to be the successor of the big cheese in monarchy / oligarchy regimes
— see the murders and rebellions in England for centuries about which killer person would take over the regime — some with foreign connection stuff.
Prime example – William of Normandy claimed the kingship of England in 1066 after the prior king died.
Result – he and his gang invade England – King Harold of the old regime killed in action.
Result – the new regime carried down to QE II — with various dynasty regime changes.
Gee – any Queen of England kids (i.e. the *subjects* of the Brit regime) carried into the U.S.A. and later running to be Prez of the U.S.A. ???
Very DARK AGE stuff — BUT NBC is still in Art. II.
Finally the NBC language *appears* to be due to a letter sent by John Jay to George Washington at the Fed Convention in 1787 (with G.W. being the presiding officer).
Jay would be appointed the first Chief Justice of SCOTUS in 1789 by President Washington.
Richard:
As you are probably well aware, this current 2012 POTUS/CINC state(s) ballot access issue may well decide the future of the 1776 US republic surpassing 1860’s civil war bloodshed and 1960s foreign progressive communist ballot access led conspiracy.
BAN blog far surpasses the paid MSM.
Congratulations on being the definitive blog on this matter.
Thank you.
@Demo Rep
What a load of ignorance. You underscored your ignorance with your statement about the Queen of England having a premature baby in the WH.
The Queen, being a foreign head of state is not under the jurisdiction of the US, thus HER child would not be NBC.
Illegal immigrants ARE under the jurisdiction of the US (that’s why they can be arrested) thus their children are NBC.
Borderraven, you’re as wrong in this forum as you have been in all others. There simply is no requirement for anyone’s father — or mother — to be a US citizen in order for the child to be a natural born citizen. This is well settled Supreme Court case law. You cannot cite even one shred of historical evidence for any such notion being the law and practice and understanding under the Constitution, while we have all the precedent on our side.
Demo Rep: Your claim is ludicrously incorrect. ALL aliens in our country ARE under US jurisdiction, unless the have diplomatic immunity as ambassadors. Under your reasoning, if a foreigner murders an American, we cannot arrest him because he’s not under our jurisdiction. You need to actually study these things before making such claims. Obama is a natural born citizen, case closed.
OK, here’s the burning question. Suppose President Obama shows up, provides his evidence, and the court rules in his favor. Will the birther movement FINALLY accept defeat? Or will they simply try again somewhere else.
This is why the President generally ignores this group. Because he knows no amount of evidence will ever sway them. They want…need..President Obama to not be eligible, and they’ll never accept any other answer, no matter how little proof to support their position.
#20
Thank you for your concerns.
ARTICLE II SUPER PAC WILL PROVIDE GAVEL TO GAVEL LIVE VIDEO COVERAGE FROM THE 3 BALLOT CHALLENGE HEARINGS ON JANUARY 26TH IN ATLANTA GEORGIA STARTING AT 9 AM ET
http://obamaballotchallenge.com/article-ii-super-pac-will-provide-gavel-to-gavel-live-video-coverage-from-the-3-ballot-challenge-hearings-on-january-26th-in-atlanta-georgia-starting-at-9-am-et
The Emperor’s New Clothes
— the story of the OBOTs and their impaired collective progressive vision
I’m a “birther” laugh at me,
if Obama wins and I lose,
then what do you win?
You fool, you lose, if I lose.
Folks with brains can look at the 1866 debates in the Senate (Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess.) about the first sentence of the 14th Amdt, Sec. 1 regarding the *jurisdiction* of the U.S.A. regarding births of new kids.
The language used was to make blacks/negroes, north and south, east and west, to be legally deemed U.S.A. citizens — to over-rule the infamous Dred Scott opinion by SCOTUS.
The other folks can rave on and on and feel good in their IGNORANCE.
The question is — Was Obama’s father a BRITISH subject/citizen the second that Obama was born [i.e. a subject/citizen of the U.K. monarchy – i.e. the Queen of England in 1961 – QE II] — WHERE EVER Obama was physically born ???
There IS a family pyramid of ALLEGIANCE to each Nation-State regime for each person — until such person gets naturalized in another regime. How and when did the ancestors of each of the U.S.A. citizens on this list become U.S.A. citizens – on 4 July 1776 or later by being a NBC or being naturalized ??? Check your personal pyramid. Things may REALLY escalate.
NEW ALLEGIANCE pyramids started by each of the 13 States (and Vermont) in 1775-1776 (Vermont in 1777 – declaring its own separate independence).
ALL foreign folks are the same – the same as the Queen of England for birth-jurisdiction purposes — whether they are in the U.S.
A. by U.S.A. consent (visas, passports, green cards, etc.), without consent (ILLEGAL invaders), by force (sex slaves brought into the U.S.A. by drug gangs, etc.) or by accident (ship wrecked, etc.).
Only if his father is a NBC. Dual citizens do not qualify for POTUS. Read the constitution and get educated.
Jim R please show us where the US Constitution says any such thing.
Say what?
“US Citizenship by Birth Matrix – Obama was born one generation too early to be a US President.”
Say what?!?
Jim R is wrong. There is absolute no support or citation for the ludicrous contention that your parents have to be citizens if you’re born on US soil. If you are born in America, you can grow up to be president. Case closed. Well, unless your dad is the ambassador from France or something!
borderraven, you’ve already lost. The matter is settled. The fact that birthers continue to file moot and frivolous actions on a settled matter will only get them fined. And when Obama wins, America wins because Obama and the Dems have already taken the country back from the right wingers who destroyed the economy. You’re not getting another shot at it.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 1914
“quo warranto”
Google Books
frame 512-515 of 1232 (page 2787)
Statute of 9 Anne
Information in the Nature of quo warranto
Barack Hussein Obama II cannot prove his father Barack Obama Sr, became a naturalized US citizen before August 4, 1961. With utmost urgency, Barack Hussein Obama II must resign from office without benefits and face trial for offenses against the US Constitution.
The Speaker of the House of Representatives must demand that Barack Hussein Obama II immediately stand down. The Speaker must also seize the White House, secure the furnishings, including all emoluments, and then swear in the next in line of succession to the US President.
He cant be president, cause he’s only a resident. He cant be truthful because of sin, when in fact he aint christian but muslim
Uh-oh, the really really dumb ones are starting to come out! Borderraven, you’ve been proven wrong on so many forums I can’t believe you’d still be around. Your claims have been debunked. There is NO authority for any assertion that parents need to be citizens when you’re born on US soil. According to British common law at the time the Constitution was written and which the Supreme Court has determined over and over that the Founders used, birth on US soil equals natural born citizenship even if the parents are aliens. Case is closed.
Have any of you ever heard of the Immigration and Nationality Act? This is the law on which U.S. citizenship is based. Stop quoting old English laws that do not apply!! Here is the Act’s provision on citizenship.
INA: ACT 301 – NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH
Sec. 301. [8 U.S.C. 1401] The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (59 Stat. 669; 22 U.S.C. 288) by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States. 302 persons born in Puerto Rico on or after April 11, 1899
Pingback: Obama citizenship case in Georgia