Thursday, April 26, 2012


Fed Court: Eligibility Question “Important and Not Trivial”
Attorney Van Irion @ Liberty Legal Foundation

Excerpt from Attorney Van Irion: In its 12-page opinion the Court made several very positive statements about our case. Here are some quotes:

The Court finds that the federal question presented, the meaning of the phrase ‘natural born citizen’ as a qualification for the Presidency set out in Article II of the Constitution, is important and not trivial.”

The issue of whether President Obama is constitutionally qualified to run for the Presidency is certainly substantial.”

It is clear that the stated federal issue of President Obama’s qualifications for the office are ‘actually disputed and substantial.’”

It is also clear that there will be a legal dispute over the Constitution’s definition of ‘natural born citizen’ and the Supreme Court’s decision in Minor.”

The Court’s statements strongly imply that it has already decided many of the issues that usually lead to procedural dismissals, and that it has decided them in our favor. While it is certainly dangerous to read too much into such an opinion, the statements from this Federal court are encouraging. The Court appears to understand the most critical issues presented by our complaint.

The Tennessee Democratic Party, the Democratic National Committee, and the DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz have already filed motions to dismiss our case. LLF will be filing our opposition to these motions within the next two weeks. We will post our filings as soon as they are filed.

MORE HERE: http://libertylegalfoundation.org/1878/fed-court-eligibility-question-important-and-not-trivial

Judge wants definition of 'natural born citizen'
'Resolution of this federal issue will resolve the case'
Excerpts via Bob Unruh @ WND

A federal judge has determined in a case challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility for a state ballot that the meaning of the constitutional phrase “natural born citizen” is “important and not trivial.”

U.S. District Judge S. Thomas Anderson of Tennessee said the courts ultimately must define “natural born citizen,” affirming that the “issue of whether President Obama is constitutionally qualified to run for the presidency is certainly substantial.”

“This specific question has been raised in numerous lawsuits filed since President Obama took office,” Anderson wrote in his opinion. “The outcome of the federal question in this case will certainly have an effect on other cases presenting the same issue about whether President Obama meets the constitutional qualifications for the presidency.” ...

... Anderson’s opinion included a notation that the U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett defined “natural born citizen” as “all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens.”

“It is undisputed that the material fact at issue in this case is whether under the circumstances of president Obama’s birth, the president is a ‘natural born citizen,’ a term set out in the United States Constitution and construed under federal law,” he wrote.

CONTINUED HERE: http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/judge-wants-definition-of-natural-born-citizen

HD VIDEO FROM 3/31 TEA PARTY EVENT WITH SHERIFF JOE POSTED HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/arizonavideo.html

-WATCH THE COMPLETE SHERIFF JOE PRESS CONFERENCE HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/joe.html -

-ARTICLE II ELIGIBILITY FACTS HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

New Ad - AZ Sheriff Arpaio - Obama Birth Cert & Draft Reg Card Are Forged! Wash Times Natl Wkly - 12 Ma...

38 comments:

  1. Is it me or is this big. Seems big to me. Thanks for posting. Good work.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The judges family and or close relatives have NOT YET been threatened by the Marxists Sock Cookers. That will happen shortly. Does ANYONE really believe that the Sock Cookers plotted and planned for over 45 years, just to be sidetracked by a Judge who can read the US Constitution ?? Give me a Break !!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yep it's HUGE but like the above poster said, no phone calls or threats have been made YET. Bet your life they're coming though.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have absolutely "no faith or respect" for our judicial system and our current representative government. Far as I am concerned every congressman on the hill should be screaming for a special prosecutor to nail Obama for the forged draft registration card. I have contacted my congressman many times, sent verifiable information on this fake and fraud in the White House but these stupid republicans are toeing the speakers line which firmly detrimental to any form of justice.

    They keep saying, "we want to beat him on the merits and ideas" but don't give a damn about purgery, forgery, and sedition? So, are they saying it is OK for us citizens to lie, forge documents, lie on applications, loan docs, tax returns?

    If this gets any traction it should be hooked up with Sheriff Joe Arpaio's investigative work dome by experts. This is the same stuff we knew about years ago but now we have badge and a gun behind it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. There's two kinds of US Citizens.
    1. Statutory
    2. Natural Born Citizens

    1&2 are mutually exclusive; if you are statutory you're not NBC, and vice versa.

    1 US citizen parent, born on US soil is just a statutory citizen per US Code.
    2 US Citizen parents born on US soil is a natural born citizen.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Quote from suntango:

    "They keep saying, "we want to beat him on the merits and ideas" but don't give a damn about purgery, forgery, and sedition? So, are they saying it is OK for us citizens to lie, forge documents, lie on applications, loan docs, tax returns?"

    Yep, that's the same kind of idiot crap I keep getting from Congress.....it is STILL, I believe, because Congressional leadership believes their sorry asses would wind up in prison if an investigation of the usurper was ever done by Congress.....therefore they command the rest of Congress to pretend the usurpation is not happening, which then makes every single one of the members of Congress guilty of, as a minimum, "misprision of treason".

    ReplyDelete
  7. @John Doe Sr. Every time Congress sends Obama a bill to sign they are tacitly acknowledging him as a legitimate president and they have sent him over 300 bills to sign into law.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I hope this is not taken as an opportunity for some court to use the Congressional Research Service documents on Obama's eligibility to determine natural born citizenship.

    The CRS works at the request of Congressional leadership. When the CRS was first asked to define the issue, it was after Obama was usurping the office of president, and all of Congress had agreed, by not objecting to Obama prior to his being sworn in, that he met the qualification requirements of the Constitution.

    The CRS had no choice but to confirm Congress was right in not objecting to Obama. If they had found Obama was not a natural born citizen, Congressional leadership, as a minimum, would be wearing prison orange. The conclusion of the CRS document was never in any doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I recall some right-wingers taking care of business in some South American country two or three decades ago. Was it El Salvador? If so, was in response to this kind of Marxist takeover of our country? If so, then maybe there's a lesson to be learned.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It's because of 2 things that the republicans won't act: 1. Everybody is correct, they are treasonous, cowardly, self serving, bribed, lying duplicitous bastards. 2. They want to do the same thing with the republican ticket, quid pro quo my usurper for yours and we're even. What do we get? The loss of our Constitution, nation and liberty by consensus. Every person in this nation who has sworn an oath to protect and defend this Constitution and has remained silent: past presidents,senators, congressman,judges at all levels, military leaders, governors, federal and state law enforcement, etc. etc. that has not spoken out and not fought this fight must not ever be trusted again, they must be permanently removed or voted out and prosecuted: pensions taken and many with jail time as felons with loss of voting privileges and some the ultimate penalty for high treason, say about the top 666 as I add them up, I just think the number fits ironically when I start adding. If you deduct 535 you'll see I'm close. It covers 2 sessions and 2 administrations, now throw in Carter, Bush Sr. Clinton and the court and so on I easily get that with some to add. When we're done we have to deal with the cowards and traitors in the press and media we'll poke them with sticks too. But let's start with the republicans first, they're the pricks been shinning our asses, eating our cake and pissing in our shoes. Lets get them first. Why are these Occupy punks out in our streets attempting to end our nation yet we aren't in the streets saving it from the usurpers? I'm ready, name the time, I know where the criminals are. Let's go and show our solidarity and singular voice. Let's go occupy Washington D.C. and not leave till this is over. At least the place would be left clean.

    ReplyDelete
  11. ECF_Judge_Anderson@tnwd.uscourts.gov

    This is the Judges Email. I wrote a nice pleasant thank you while demonstrating my concerns and opinions. You should too. Do not be angry, be sensible, and be correct, deal with the facts only and again appeal to his good senses.

    ReplyDelete
  12. SUNTANGO @9:10PM

    Every member of Congress and for that matter, everyone in government KNOWS OBAMA IS A FRAUD:

    THEY LIVE ON HOPE, NOT ACTION.

    THEY DO NOT WANT TO BE IMPLICATED IN A COVER-UP.

    By doing nothing, they have "plausible deniability"....Washington's favorite alibi...

    Any wagers on the Federal Court moving for a criminal investigation?

    I SAY NADA...

    THE ONLY WAY OBAMA WILL BE OFF THE BALLOT IS THE 25TH AMENDMENT OR A CRIMINAL ARREST.

    Anyone want to volunteer for a citizen's arrest?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Keep your fingers crossed. This Judge at least seems to be weighing and considering the issue. Only time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "A federal judge has determined in a case challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility for a state ballot that the meaning of the constitutional phrase “natural born citizen” is “important and not trivial.”

    Yes, because Van Irion was arguing that it wasn't a Federal question. Hence, his motion was denied. But something being "important and not trivial" won't necessarily grant standing to the petitioner.

    "... Anderson’s opinion included a notation that the U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett defined “natural born citizen” as “all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens.”"

    And it's telling that in reading the opinion, the judge doesn't necessarily agree with the argument. He specifically begins the phrase with "The First Amended complaint also alleges..."

    ReplyDelete
  15. "The Tennessee Democratic Party, the Democratic National Committee, and the DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz have already filed motions to dismiss our case"

    When we start naming the traitors we gotta first start with those that gave us the Usurper to start with - the PRIVATE organization, who had no right under our Constitution to put this man up as the nominee: the Democratic Party USA.

    And what I would like to know is who is it that talked to Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, and even Michael Savage who hints around the edges every once in a while, etc...all of the conservative talkers that makes them all silent about any of this stuff? What were they told?

    I still talk to people all the time on our side that know nothing about these issues.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I read the ruling http://libertylegalfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/CCA-TN-Or.-Denying-Remand.pdf and I can't see this judge later determining that MvH is miss-worded. I think it will simply take one federal judge to find in our favor and accurately state MvH as the proper definition that it clearly is to upend Obama's tea cart. Hopefully this federal Judge is uncorrectable. It believe it can happen occasional. I think I'll give the LLF folks some well earned money. 3 weeks for LLF to reply to other motions and then a week (minimum) to answer means we may see the next ruling mid May. Bravo LLF!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well guys, there's some wishful thinking here. Here's my take.

    Remember, this decision was about whether the Van Irion lawsuit should be moved to federal court or state in Tennessee. Based on constiututional issues that Mr. Van Irion presented,(Nobama doesn't meet Article 2 requirements), the judge agreed with the DNC that the case should be moved to federal court and denied Van Irion's motion to keep the case in Tennesee.

    What's sad, is that the quotes that seem to show the judge was on our side have been taken out of context. The judge wasn't saying he agreed Nobama is ineligible, he was saying that the issue of whether he's eligible is a federal not a state court issue. For example, when the Judge said,

    “Because the federal issue raised in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint is a question of constitutional law, the Court finds that this factor is not entirely relevant to the case at bar.However, the other factors suggest that the issue of whether President Obama is constitutionally qualified to run for the Presidency is certainly substantial.”

    he was saying the constitutionality of the Usurper's eligibility is a substantial issue in deciding that this case should go to federal court. When the judge said,

    "First, the Court finds that the federal question presented, the meaning of the phrase
    'natural born citizen' as a qualification for the Presidency set out in Article II of the Constitution, is important and not trivial. The Court finds it self-evident that an individual’s ability to meet the constitutional qualifications to serve as President of the United States, particularly where the individual already holds the office, ranks as 'significant federal issue.'"

    all the judge is saying is that Mr. Van Irion rasied significant issues of federal law, not state law.

    Finally, when the judge said,

    "It is also clear that there will be a legal dispute over the Constitution’s definition of 'natural born citizen' and the Supreme Court’s decision in Minor. The federal issue presented is obviously contested in this case."

    the judge is saying that the basis of Van Irion's case involves legal questions that can only be dealt with at the federal level.

    I wouldn't waste my time thanking the judge for his remarks. All he did was spell out why the Van Irion lawsuit should be decided in federal court.

    ReplyDelete
  18. From the Minor v. Happ decision:

    ""For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts."

    In other words, the court did not solve the doubts of what constitutes a natural born citizen. Minor was born of two parents on US soil and by those circumstances she was undoubtedly a "citizen." But the judges clearly go out of their way to state that there are several arguments for what constitutes a "natural born citizen," and that for the purposes of this case it was not necessary to settle those arguments.

    "For the purposes of this case," (because Minor was clearly a "citizen" of the United States), "it is not necessary to solve these doubts." (Which the court clearly does not do)

    Minor was overturned by the 19th amendment, leaving only the argument of whether Minor could be considered a "citizen" or not, which the court clearly ruled she was.

    No court will ever interpret the decision in this case any other way, because of one sentence in the entire decision. In fact, it appears that many of the attorneys who are fighting the eligibility issue ever bring up this one sentence and argue against it. They actually seem to avoid it at all costs.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The federal government is a criminal enterprise.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "The Court’s statements strongly imply that it has already decided many of the issues that usually lead to procedural dismissals, and that it has decided them in our favor. While it is certainly dangerous to read too much into such an opinion, the statements from this Federal court are encouraging."

    Only fools who are not attorneys would read this as encouraging. The only procedural issue decided by the court is that this case presents a federal question and therefore the case should not be remanded to the state court from which it was removed. That's it. Nothing more. But don't let that reality get in the way of your excitement.

    The motions to dismiss will be granted.

    ReplyDelete
  21. It's the one year anniversary of the fake long form birth certificate! I think we've made some progress and opened more citizens' eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  22. @Anonymous

    "In other words, the court did not solve the doubts of what constitutes a natural born citizen."

    +++

    Silly Obot. Go blow your smoke elsewhere!

    They clearly say there is NO DOUBT about children born on soil to two citizen parents.

    Here's the relevant part that you chose to leave out.

    “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, IT WAS NEVER DOUBTED THAT ALL CHILDREN BORN IN A COUNTRY OF PARENTS WHO WERE ITS CITIZENS became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. THESE WERE natives or NATURAL-BORN CITIZENS, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, BUT NEVER AS TO THE FIRST. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts.....”

    ReplyDelete
  23. TIME TO PUT OUR DIFFERENCES ASIDE.

    The one with the BALLS is hanging it all on the line and TAKING IT TO THE HOOP..!

    ALL "MUST" GET BEHIND THIS..!!! (Whether you like her or not!)

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=46120

    ReplyDelete
  24. @suntango

    Suntango....exactly! Waiting for an agreeable definition that suits every side will take too long....perhaps the reasoning here. But there is probable cause established in Arpaio's investigation with evidence to show, but nowhere to go in this regime's appointed persons willing to break laws themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  25. @CK

    Go pimp her lies and gobbledygook somewhere else!

    ReplyDelete
  26. They will rule that Natural Born Citizen means vaginal birth on US soil.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The Constitution does say who shall be NBC. Many American generations were taught in government classes that it takes two US citizen parents to become NBC. The Constitution differs between citizens and NBC when it requires a POTUS must be NBC except for the then current candidates who wrote the Constitution and the people they served being exempt for that clause but their loyalties were carefully searched because a CIC must put the USA first when asking it's military to shed their blood, unlike the piece of garbage now who is practicing jihad crap by killing every American he can; such as abortions and war and race violence. The past few generations have been taught just the opposite that it only requires you be a citizen and doesn't matter if your parents are not citizen's. The fix was in and no one saw it coming until sob/usob steps to the plate. He has told the world many times his daddy is sob SR. and that makes him not NBC, PERIOD even though their are four or five different stories of who this creep is. IF America gets through this destructive usurpation commie takeover, which I really believe we are in the Last Days as spoken of by Jesus, the law should require parents to bring birth certificates to the hospital to determine their country status and if they don't have then automatically the document for the newborn will be stamped NOT NBC or NBC, PERIOD. He has got to go before the election or we are screwed big time. All of congress has committed HIGH TREASON, even Allen West is jumping around the issue and he is supposed to be a tough guy. If I were in congress I would scream daily about this usurper and would NOT care for the money or bribes but for what is right in any every issue and what is right for America and I would filibuster if legal to do so. No one is doing this at all. No judge will stand up so they are the ones who don't have standing, "We the People," DO have standing and no one is allowing us our constitutional rights. I am against most everything they have done in the past few years and it is just common sense to vote against all that crap, such as; gay anything, abortion, lying azz msm, fake ss#, fake selective service application, fake bc and etc.......... It's either FEMA camps and coffins or LET'S ROLL, throw the bum out.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 8:19, I support Orly. I need to know, what did she lie about?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Federal Judge denies realease of Bin Laden's "death" photos in the name of "national security".
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/26/justice/bin-laden-photos/index.html?eref=rss_crime

    now why am i so surprised??

    under duresss, this judge will use the same boiler plate excuse.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Finally, someone is asking the right question!

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Anonymous
    BIN LADEN HAS BEEN DEAD FOR ALL THESE YEARS! THIS WAS A FALSE FLAG ATTACK PURE AND SIMPLE!

    ReplyDelete
  32. In reply to Anon @ 6:06 - You are either not understand the quote you posted or are purposfully twisting it's meaning.

    "For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts."

    The doubt was whether one born of non-citizens was even a citizen. There was no question that they were NOT natural-born. Nobody needs to address it because words have meanings and the sentence doesn't say what you claim it does. Wong Kim Ark later resolved those doubts by granting citizenship from birth to someone without citizen parents. However, they STILL did not declare him 'natural born'.

    Hope this clears your confusion.

    ReplyDelete
  33. does anybody have some old law dictionaries to see what the legal definition was 100 years ago?

    ReplyDelete
  34. @anonymous 2:42

    You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. I hope that clears up YOUR confusion.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The founding fathers were schooled in "Law of Nations" by Vattel. They had 5 copies. Just google it! There is no question what natural born requires. No Judge, Jury, Court, Senator, Congressman, Bill, Law, or public opinion can change our Constitution! A2. S1. p5 has never been amended! Natural Born means the same today it meant when our founders read Law of Nations.

    ReplyDelete
  36. @Anonymous

    "ANONYMOUS AT 2:42"
    IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT---- "CITIZEN" , YOU DUMMY "MINOR" SPEAKS OF DUBIOUS PROPRIETY RE CITIZENSHIP(U.S.) OF THOSE BORN ON THE SOIL(U.S.) WITHOUT REGARD TO THE CIT STATUS OF THEIR PARENTS

    NOW, GO AWAY CREEP

    ReplyDelete
  37. Jack Van Impe -- The Truth About Hell 1 of 2


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m03BbUBY4A&feature=relmfu


    Uploaded on May 8, 2011


    "Reclaiming and Restoring Biblical Christianity"


    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


    Jack Van Impe -- The Truth About Hell 2 of 2


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0i8YM7NFs54&feature=relmfu


    Uploaded on May 8, 2011


    "Reclaiming and Restoring Biblical Christianity"


    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    ReplyDelete
  38. Natural Born Citizen could be defined from Law of Nations by Vattel published in 1768 and favored by the founding fathers. Maybe be one or two million citizens need to petition their government to decide this issue?

    ReplyDelete

“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to publish whatever I please on any subject.” - Elijah Parish Lovejoy(1802-1837)

Comments posted here do not necessarily reflect the views of BirtherReport.com. Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post on this web site.