Rule of Law or Rule of Man–Supreme Court Cracking The Constitution?
“As long as I have any choice, I will stay only in a country where political liberty, toleration, and equality of all citizens before the law are the rule.”
~Albert Einstein
The most important political development of the second millennium was the firm establishment, first in one or two countries, then in many, of the rule of law. Its acceptance and enforcement in any society is far more vital to the happiness of the majority than is even democracy itself. For democracy, without the rule of law to uphold the wishes of the electorate, is worthless, as the history of the past half-century has shown again and again in Africa, Latin America and Asia. The Soviet Union had, in theory, a wonderfully democratic constitution, But it lacked the rule of law entirely, and as a result Stalin was able to murder 30 million of its citizens and die safely in his bed, unarraigned and unpunished.
“What do we mean by the rule of law? We mean a judicial regime in which everyone is equal before the law, and everyone–and every institution–is subject to it.”
~Paul Johnson, Laying Down the Law, The Wall St. Journal, March 10, 1999,
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=65000285
Article Two of the United States Constitution is fairly clear that Presidents of the United States must meet three minimum qualifications:
Qualification, disqualification and common practice
Article Two of the Constitution sets the principal qualifications to be eligible for election as President. A Presidential candidate must:
- be a natural-born citizen of the United States;
- be at least thirty-five years old;
- have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.
Additionally, the Constitution disqualifies some people from the Presidency. Under Article One of the United States Constitution, the Senate has the option, upon conviction, of disqualifying impeached individuals from holding other federal offices, including the Presidency.[4] Under the Twenty-Second Amendment, no one can be elected President more than twice. The Twenty-Second Amendment also specifies that anyone who serves more than two years as President or Acting President, of a term for which someone else was elected President, can only be elected President once. Scholars disagree whether a person no longer eligible to be elected President could be elected Vice President, pursuant to the qualifications set out under the Twelfth Amendment.[5]
Foreign-born Americans at the time the Constitution was adopted were also eligible to become President, provided they met the age and residency requirements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States
This Friday, December 5, 2008, the Supreme Court is apparently going to review whether Barack Obama meets the natural-born citizen requirement of the United States Constitution.
At first I did not believe anyone would run for President that did not at least meet these minimum requirements.
When I looked into the issue of Senator Barack Obama’s unwillness to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to a Federal District court and now the Supreme Court, I got mad.
The Democratic Party should have required any candidate for President of the United States to submit a birth certificate for its review before placing his or her name in nomination and made copies available to the press.
If the United States Supreme Court fails to review and enforce the natural-born citizen Constitutional requirement, then I am forced to sadly conclude we are no longer a nation under law.
A dangerous precedent will have been established by ignoring a very clear Constitutional requirement of Presidents of the United States.
All President-elect Obama needs to do is to have the State of Hawaii send directly to the Supreme Court a copy of his birth certificate and the entire issue becomes moot.
If President-elect Obama refuses to submit his birth certificate to the court, he should be ordered to step aside and Vice-President elect Biden becomes President of the United States on January 20, 2009.
“When freedom does not have a purpose, when it does not wish to know anything about the rule of law engraved in the hearts of men and women, when it does not listen to the voice of conscience, it turns against humanity and society.”
~Pope John Paul II
Background Articles and Videos
Suit contesting Barack Obama’s citizenship heads to U.S. Supreme Court Friday
Justices will decide whether to consider the case
“…The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama’s U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama’s election. …”
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-obama-birth-certificatedec04,0,664988.story
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
Supremes to review citizenship arguments
Case challenging candidacy set for ‘conference’ of justices
By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=81484
The Unending Saga of Barack Obama’s FAKE Birth Certificate Controversy
November 26th, 2008· Posted by Velvet Hammer
“…Given the circumstances, if Barack Obama respected this nation, he would prove it by the simplest and easiest of gestures – unless, of course, all this talk about change and hope was just a bunch of bull, and he’s just “another politician.” Here’s the outline:
1. Under Hawaiian law, it is possible (both legally and illegally) for a person to have been born out of state, yet have a birth certificate on file in the Department of Health.
A. From Hawaii’s official Department of Health, Vital Records webpage: “Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country” (applies to adopted children). …”
The buzz about Barack’s birth certificate
By Michelle Malkin
We tried to obtain a copy of Obama’s birth certificate, but his campaign would not release it and the state of Hawaii does not make such records public.
Has anyone seen it? Why shouldn’t the record be in the public domain for presidential candidates?
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/10/the-buzz-about-baracks-birth-certificate/
Natural-born Citizen
“US constitutional definition
The special term “Natural-Born Citizen” is used in particular as a requirement for eligibility to serve as President or Vice President of the United States. Section 1 of Article II of the Constitution contains the clause:
| “ | No Person except a natural born Citizen, 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. | ” |
Additionally, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution states that: “[N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides an additional source of constitutional doctrine stating that birth “in the United States” and subjection to U.S. jurisdiction at the time of birth, entitles one to citizenship:
| “ | All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. . . | ” |
However, the full text of the fourteenth amendment does not mention the phrase “natural-born citizen,” nor does it address Presidential qualifications. The phrase “natural born Citizen” is not defined anywhere in the Constitution.
Section 8 of Article I confers on Congress the power “to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization…” This power has been construed to include defining the characteristics of a “natural born citizen”, as well as the conditions of “naturalization”.
The 1790 Congress, many of whose members had been members of the Constitutional Convention, provided in the Naturalization Act of 1790 that “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens.” In addition George Washington was president of the Constitutional Convention and President of the United States when this bill became law. If Washington disagreed with this definition, he could have vetoed this bill. …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO
BERG’S WRIT OF CERTIORARI
FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS
(Contact information and PDF at end)
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 11/07/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.
Mr. Berg remarked today, “I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama’s response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States.”
Mr. Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. Mr. Berg filed a Writ of Certiorari for review of the case and an injunction to stay the election pending review. Justice Souter denied the injunction. It is expected that the Court will decide whether or not to review Berg v. Obama after the Defendants file their response, and Mr. Berg has replied to the Defendant’s response.
The Defendants’ response is due by December 1st and Mr. Berg’s reply will be submitted thereafter.
Obama Citizenship
1/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
2/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
3/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
4/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
5/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
6/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
7/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
Obama Crimes
U.S. Supreme Court Update Regarding The December 01, 2008 Deadline |
“…We understand everyone is eager to learn what occurred on December 1, 2008, at the U.S. Supreme Court. There is a rumor claiming Mr. Obama was Court Ordered by Justice Souter to turn over his birth certificate by December 1, 2008. This is NOT true.
When a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari is filed the Defendants automatically are given thirty (30) days to respond. They are not required to respond. The end of thirty (30) Days in the Berg v. Obama case was December 1, 2008. Keep in mind, the Defendants could have mailed in a response to the Petition for Writ of Certiorari and the Court allows approximately a week for mail. If this is the case, the envelopes must be postmarked December 1, 2008.
In the afternoon, December 1, 2008, Lisa, Mr. Berg’s Assistant contacted the U.S. Supreme Court and spoke with the Clerk. The Clerk informed Lisa Mr. Berg’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari would be distributed to all nine (9) Justices and a conference should be set within ten (10) days. As I’m sure you are aware, during the conference the Justices will discuss Mr. Berg’s Petition for the Writ of Certiorari and decide whether or not to grant or deny the Petition. It only takes four (4) out of nine (9) Justices to agree to grant Mr. Berg’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari. The Justices can also make other Orders during the Conference.
Mr. Berg’s Office also learned the Solicitor General is only representing the Federal Election Commission.
Additional documents will be filed within the next couple of days. All Legal briefs will be posted on our website, so please continue checking back for updates. …”
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Columbo: One More Question Senator Obama–Why will you not show the American People your birth certificate?
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 6 so far )Columbo: One More Question Senator Obama–Why will you not show the American People your birth certificate?
The most important political development of the second millennium was the firm establishment, first in one or two countries, then in many, of the rule of law. Its acceptance and enforcement in any society is far more vital to the happiness of the majority than is even democracy itself. For democracy, without the rule of law to uphold the wishes of the electorate, is worthless, as the history of the past half-century has shown again and again in Africa, Latin America and Asia. The Soviet Union had, in theory, a wonderfully democratic constitution, But it lacked the rule of law entirely, and as a result Stalin was able to murder 30 million of its citizens and die safely in his bed, unarraigned and unpunished.
“What do we mean by the rule of law? We mean a judicial regime in which everyone is equal before the law, and everyone–and every institution–is subject to it.”
~Paul Johnson, Laying Down the Law, The Wall St. Journal, March 10, 1999,
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=65000285
What the American people want to know Senator Obama is why you will not produce in court a certified copy of your birth certificate to prove to the American people that you are in fact a natural-born citizen of the United States as required by Article Two, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States of America?
Article Two of the United States Constitution
Clause 5: Qualifications for office
No person except a natural born Citizen, 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.
Columbo – No More Questions
columbo – “i really love my work, sir”
Birth Certificate Lawsuit – Obama can’t be President?
Obama Crimes
U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO
BERG’S WRIT OF CERTIORARI
FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS
(Contact information and PDF at end)
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 11/07/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.
Mr. Berg remarked today, “I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama’s response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States.”
Mr. Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. Mr. Berg filed a Writ of Certiorari for review of the case and an injunction to stay the election pending review. Justice Souter denied the injunction. It is expected that the Court will decide whether or not to review Berg v. Obama after the Defendants file their response, and Mr. Berg has replied to the Defendant’s response.
The Defendants’ response is due by December 1st and Mr. Berg’s reply will be submitted thereafter.
Obama Citizenship
1/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
2/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
3/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
4/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
5/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
6/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
7/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
Background Articles and Videos
The Supreme Court and Obama’s Birth Certificate
“…At this point, Supreme Court Justice David Souter’s Clerk informed Philip J. Berg, the lawyer who brought the case against Obama, that his petition for an injunction to stay the November 4th election was denied, but the Clerk also required the defendants to respond to the Writ of Certiorari (which requires the concurrence of four Justices) by December 1. At that time, Mr. Obama must present to the Court an authentic birth certificate, after which Mr. Berg will respond.
If Obama fails to do that, it is sure to inspire the skepticism of the Justices, who are unaccustomed to being defied. They will have to decide what to do about a president-elect who refuses to prove his natural-born citizenship.
“I can see a unanimous Court (en banc) decertifying the election if Obama refuses to produce his birth certificate,” says Raymond S. Kraft, an attorney and writer. “They cannot do otherwise without abandoning all credibility as guardians of the Constitution. Even the most liberal justices, however loathe they may to do this, still consider themselves guardians of the Constitution. The Court is very jealous of its power – even over presidents, even over presidents-elect.” …”
http://thevalleytruth.wordpress.com/2008/11/07/the-supreme-court-and-obamas-birth-certificate/
Obama’s birth certificate sealed by Hawaii governor
Says Democratic senator must make request to obtain original document
By Jerome R. Corsi
“…Although the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama’s birth certificate has become a focus of intense speculation – and even several lawsuits – WND has learned that Hawaii’s Gov. Linda Lingle has placed the candidate’s birth certificate under seal and instructed the state’s Department of Health to make sure no one in the press obtains access to the original document under any circumstances.
The governor’s office officially declined a request made in writing by WND in Hawaii to obtain a copy of the hospital-generated original birth certificate of Barack Obama.
“It does not appear that Dr. Corsi is within any of these categories of persons with a direct and tangible interest in the birth certificate he seeks,” wrote Roz Makuala, manager of constituent services in the governor’s office, in an e-mailed response to a WND request seeking the information.
Those listed as entitled to obtain a copy of an original birth certificate include the person born, or “registrant” according to the legal description from the governor’s office, the spouse or parent of the registrant, a descendant of the registrant, a person having a common ancestor with the registrant, a legal guardian of the registrant, or a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant. …”
“…In a startling development, Obama’s Kenyan grandmother has reportedly alleged she witnessed Obama’s birth at the Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.
Friday, U.S. Federal judge Richard Barclay Surrick, a Clinton appointee, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Pennsylvania attorney Phillip J. Berg who alleged Obama was not a U.S. “natural born” citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency under the specifications of the U.S. Constitution, under Article II, Section 1.
Berg told WND last week he does not have a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Obama that he alleges exists.
In Kenya, WND was told by government authorities that all documents concerning Obama were under seal until after the U.S. presidential election on November 4.
The Obama campaign website entitled “Fight the Smears” posts a state of Hawaii “Certificate of Live Birth” which is obviously not the original birth certificate generated by the hospital where Obama reportedly was born.
“Fight the Smears” declares, “The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America.”
Although the Obama campaign could immediately put an end to all the challenges by simply producing the candidate’s original birth certificate, it has not done so. And the “Fight the Smears” website offers no explanation as to why Obama has refused to request, and make public, an original hospital-generated birth certificate which the Hawaii Department of Health may possess. …”
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=79174
Natural-born Citizen
“US constitutional definition
The special term “Natural-Born Citizen” is used in particular as a requirement for eligibility to serve as President or Vice President of the United States. Section 1 of Article II of the Constitution contains the clause:
| “ | No Person except a natural born Citizen, 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. | ” |
Additionally, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution states that: “[N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides an additional source of constitutional doctrine stating that birth “in the United States” and subjection to U.S. jurisdiction at the time of birth, entitles one to citizenship:
| “ | All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. . . | ” |
However, the full text of the fourteenth amendment does not mention the phrase “natural-born citizen,” nor does it address Presidential qualifications. The phrase “natural born Citizen” is not defined anywhere in the Constitution.
Section 8 of Article I confers on Congress the power “to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization…” This power has been construed to include defining the characteristics of a “natural born citizen”, as well as the conditions of “naturalization”.
The 1790 Congress, many of whose members had been members of the Constitutional Convention, provided in the Naturalization Act of 1790 that “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens.” In addition George Washington was president of the Constitutional Convention and President of the United States when this bill became law. If Washington disagreed with this definition, he could have vetoed this bill. …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
Columbo
Columbo theme
Obama Birth Certificate Church Presentation
Columbo’s “Excuse Me Mr. Obama”-
“…These things seem to either be locked up or not available. They should be available as part of the public record given the high office you are seeking to win, Sir. I’ m sure it’s just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are..
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
Let’s see here….Ah, Yes, Sir It’s just a short list….Shouldn’t take too long if we could just get together, Sir……AllI need is :
Your Occidental College records
Your Columbia College records
Your Columbia Thesis paper
Your Harvard College records
Your Selective Service Registration
Your medical records
Your Illinois State Senate records
Your Illinois State Senate schedule
Your Law practice client list
A Certified Copy of your original Birth certificate
Your embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth
Your Harvard Law Review articles that were published
Your University of Chicago scholarly articles
Your Record of baptism
Oh hey… listen, Sir ! I know you are VERY busy! Is this too much for you now? I mean,…I tell you what. I will come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know? I mean, I know you are busy, so I will just let myself out……But I will be back tomorrow. And the day after………..
Who wants to know these things ask Senator Obama? Columbo answered:
THE PEOPLE …”
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/columbo-obama.htm
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Obama’s Outrageous October Socialist Sweet Surprise–How Sweet It Is?
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 7 so far )
Pronk Palisades 
You must be logged in to post a comment.