John McCain's Panama problem

[malibuu]

Did you all know that they passed some kind of resolution in Congress deeming John McCain a natural born citizen?

Yes, a meaningless resolution by Congress which holds no weight whatsoever.

Congress has no authority in that regards - the Supreme Court has the responsibility of interpreting the constitution - and will here as well.

Naturalized citizens and native-born citizens are accorded the same citizenship rights - except according to the Supreme Court in one regards - eligibility to be the nation's executive.

And btw, the lawsuit filed in New Hampshire by a pro se individual plaintiff has some legal, technical flaws.

 

[malibuu]

. . . now at this late date we are going to try and do something about it. I say YES. Please any attorneys out there that will help us, we need to file some law suits damn it. We need to do, not just talk about it.

A technically solid lawsuit - in preparation for months - against McCain is to be filed very soon now that he is the official nominee of the Republican Party.

 

[brooklyn]

Please keep us up to date with the law suit.

 

[fedup100]

A technically solid lawsuit - in preparation for months - against McCain is to be filed very soon now that he is the official nominee of the Republican Party.

Hum Hum Hum Hum, Hum Ha Hum can't touch that, Hum Hum Hum Hum, Hum Ha Hum, can't touch that...........yiiiiipppeeeee!!!!!!

 

[angelatc]

they are NOW, but were they in 1936? apparently the law has changed down through the years. also, there is some question about if the hospital that McCain was supposedly born in was even built at the time - could he have been born outside the canal zone in some temporary facility? all the angles and wrinkles have to be considered, not just what flies off the top of one's head at the time.

lynn

If you hadn't clipped the rest of my post you'd see that I answered that question.

That particular philosophy, as well as the laws that make it so, predate the Constitution.

Apparently you're the one with random things flying off your head.

 

[angelatc]

I mean how on earth can a bi sexual Black muslim non citizen with a cocaine habit who wants to limit how much food you can eat be the front runner......

It's freedom, baby!

 

[angelatc]

I and others have posted copius posts regarding this and O'S not being a citizen. I got the usual "it's been posted and vetted already".

NO IT HASN'T,

Yes, it has. Over and over and over and over and over. Just because you're too thick for your own good doesn't change that.

Good luck finding a lawyer. I hear they're all lizard people.

 

[qh4dotcom]

John McCain now has to break two laws to reach the White House...break the law in Texas and get his name on the Texas ballot even though legally he cannot appear since he missed the August 26th Texas filing deadline and break the law of the Constitution that he wasn't born in the US and therefore is not a natural born citizen.

Hopefully enough public outrage will prevent him from weaseling his way out of obeying those laws.

 

[malibuu]

. . .

Good luck finding a lawyer. . . .

Many of the 55 framers of the Constitution were legal scholars.

McCain was born in 1936 near Colon, Panama - presumably on the base at Coco Solo - but definitely not in the "Coco Solo Naval Hospital" as it was not even authorized to be built yet.

The physician who - as I understand it now - either actually delivered the baby boy or at least signed the birth certificate - was assigned as medical staff for the base.

But I believe it does not really matter if he delivered the baby in Colon, Panama at the hospital or somewhere actually on the base - it will not matter to the Court I believe.

The issues about Obama really have been to obfuscate the true matters about the GOP candidate

 

[angelatc]

Jt he wasn't born in the US and therefore is not a natural born citizen.

So you're arguing that the baby of in illegal immigrant has more right to the Presidency than the baby of a child born to two citizens abroad serving in the defense of the nation. Funny stuff you got there.

Just for kicks, since lots of posters here have cited law and documented court decisions beginning in the 1700's and proceeding methodically up to the most current codes to support the contention that children born to American citizens are indeed naturally born US citizens, what do you have to support your contention that they actually aren't?


Besides "No they aren't!," I mean.

 

[angelatc]

Many of the 55 framers of the Constitution were legal scholars.

McCain was born in 1936 near Colon, Panama - presumably on the base at Coco Solo - but definitely not in the "Coco Solo Naval Hospital" as it was not even authorized to be built yet.

He was born to two US citizens. That means he was naturally born a US citizen.


It does not matter if he was born on Mars, in Panama, in the lost city of Atlantis, in the Bohemian Woods, on a submarine or on an airplane. He was born a US citizen, naturally.

 

[malibuu]

He was born to two US citizens. That means he was naturally born a US citizen.


It does not matter if he was born on Mars, in Panama, in the lost city of Atlantis, in the Bohemian Woods, on a submarine or on an airplane. He was born a US citizen, naturally.

It matters very, very much actually - it is called the principle of jus soli - law of the soil.

Jus sanguinis - law of the bloodline - is not embodied in the U.S. Constitution and is called a derivative citizenship.

Even if born in a U.S. registered sea vessel in international waters, or on a U.S. registered aircraft outside U.S. airspace,
even if to U.S. citizen parents, you would not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of the place of birth.

 

[qh4dotcom]

So you're arguing that the baby of in illegal immigrant has more right to the Presidency than the baby of a child born to two citizens abroad serving in the defense of the nation.

The Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution did not and would have never allowed military operations and bases in over 130 countries...and that includes Panama where McCain was born...Panama wasn't a threat to the US when McCain was born.

So unless you say that the Founders would have been happy with military operations in Panama, it was not their intent to make children of the military born in Panama to be natural born citizens of the US. The Founders wanted no foreign entanglements and the parents of John McCain were not obeying their wishes by being in Panama.

“Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.”

That quote from the government website is very clear...sorry it doesn't make exceptions for children born to two US citizens....applies to all children...you have been influenced by "the widespread popular belief."

 

[angelatc]

It matters very, very much actually - it is called the principle of jus soli - law of the soil.

Jus sanguinis - law of the bloodline - is not embodied in the U.S. Constitution and is called a derivative citizenship.

Even if born in a U.S. registered sea vessel in international waters, or on a U.S. registered aircraft outside U.S. airspace,
even if to U.S. citizen parents, you would not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of the place of birth.

Bangs head - Law of bloodline was and is abslutely embodied in the Constitution.

Stop talking about where he was born. It is a non-issue in this instance. McCain is a natural born citizen because he was born to two US citizens.


I am quite familiar with the legal background of the framers of the Constitution. I am also familiar with the arguments that cite court decisions going back to English common law, and are the groundwork that the framers started with.

I am familiar with 200+ laws and codes written to define and refine what the term natural born is meant to include, and I am familiar with the court decisions and Congressional changes to expand those defintions.

What do you have, exactly, to support your side? Other than reallly wishful thinking, I mean?

 

[angelatc]

The Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution did not and would have never allowed military operations and bases in over 130 countries...and that includes Panama where McCain was born...Panama wasn't a threat to the US when McCain was born.

So unless you say that the Founders would have been happy with military operations in Panama, it was not their intent to make children of the military born in Panama to be natural born citizens of the US. The Founders wanted no foreign entanglements and the parents of John McCain were not obeying their wishes by being in Panama.



That quote from the government website is very clear...sorry it doesn't make exceptions for children born to two US citizens....applies to all children...you have been influenced by "the widespread popular belief."

I am saying that when the Founders were writing their laws, half the damned country had family abroad, and it took months to travel across the ocean. I am absolutely saying that the framers insisted that children born to US citizens were natural born citizens even when they were born abroad.

Don't quote websites. Don't quote theories. Quote laws and legal decisions.

 

[malibuu]

McCain is a natural born citizen because he was born to two US citizens.

That is just not true.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86755.pdf

 

[malibuu]

. . . Stop talking about where he was born. . . .

That is the very issue because that is what previous Supreme Court decisions have explicitly expressed as the executive requirement of Art. II, 1

 

[Razmear]

At this point it wouldn't matter if McCain was born in Cuba. He was the 'chosen one' from the start of the election cycle and no number of lawsuits is going to remove him from the ballot.

The law doesn't apply to folks like McCain, Bush and Cheney anymore.

eb

 

[angelatc]

That is just not true.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86755.pdf

Yes it is, unless you're contending that neither of his parents ever lived in the United States. From the very first page of your link:

U.S. citizenship may be acquired either at birth or through naturalization.

Jus sanguinis (the law of the bloodline ), a concept of Roman or civil law under which a person’s citizenship is determined by the citizenship of one or both parents. This rule, frequently called “citizenship by descent” or “derivative citizenship”, is not embodied in the U.S. Constitution, but such citizenship is granted through statute.

Unless you're implying that Congress doesn't have the authority to define by statute, which it does, or you're implying that Congress never defined it by statute, which it did, you don't have much to stand on. You need to go back to the 1700's to look for the precedents and laws that resulted.

Naturalization is “the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth

.

Because McCain is a citizen at birth, he isn't naturalized.

If you're saying that the constitution itself does not define what “natural born” actually means, and the Supreme Court has never defined it or ruled on it, then there's a phrase for that but it escapes me. However, when the Court refuses to hear a case, it usually means it agrees with the decisions of the lower courts.

 

[angelatc]

That is the very issue because that is what previous Supreme Court decisions have explicitly expressed as the executive requirement of Art. II, 1

No, they have not.