A little late on this one, which was Dismissed with Prejudice on January 24, by Judge John A. Gibney, Jr., in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division. Charles Tisdale’s Motion for Injunction, against President Obama and Virginia elections officials, sought to bar Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, (and mentioning Rick Santorum), from both the March 6 Primary ballot and the General Election ballot in November.
Additionally, Tisdale sought permanent changes in Virginia State Board of Elections practices, based on the two-parent natural born citizenship theory currently and prominently being hawked by the Vatellists of the Birther movement. In his Exhibits, Tisdale included a copy of the President’s long form birth certificate, though none for the other candidates, stipulating that President Obama was born in the United States.
In his Order, Judge Gibney wrote:
The eligibility requirements to be President of the United States are such that the individual must be a “natural born citizen” of the United States and at least thirty-five years of age. U.S. Const.art. II, 1. It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens. See, e.g., United States v. Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702 (1898) (“Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States.”)’ Perkis v. Elg, 99 F.2d 408, 409 (1938). Moreover, “those born ‘in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’ … have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding…and thus eligible for the presidency.” Hollander v. McCain, 566 F. Supp. 2d 63, 66 (D.N.H 2008). Thus, Mr. Tisdale’s contention that President Obama, Governor Romney, and Congressman Paul are not eligible to be President due to their nationalities is without merit.
In Ankeny v. Gov. of Indiana in 2009, which also cited Hollander v. McCain and United States v. Wong Kim Ark, it was found that:
Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.
This past week, an Administrative Law Judge in Georgia cited the Indiana State Court ruling in his finding:
The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Id. at 688. This Court finds the decision and analysis of Arkeny [sic] persuasive. …
For the purposes of this analysis, this Court considered that President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Arkeny, he became a
citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen.
Ankeny had been cited by the Defense Attorney Mike Jablonski in a Motion to Dismiss filed in December.
In ballot challenge hearings at the Illinois State Board of Elections this past Friday:
Jackson v. Obama, 12 SOEB GP 104 (Jan. 27, 2012) (hearing officer recommendation) (Obama’s birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility for office as a “Natural Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. State Bd. of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012); Freeman v. Obama, 12 SOEB GP 103 (Jan. 27, 2012) (hearing officer recommendation) (Obama’s birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility for office as a “Natural Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. State Board of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012).
Considering that Ankeny alone involved four judges, adding the rest, we have quite a few judges who are declaring Barack Obama a natural born citizen. More to come, no doubt.
Furthermore, the Congressional Research Service has issued legal advisories to Members of Congress that:
The constitutional history and relevant case law thus indicate that one born “in” the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, that is, when one’s parents are not official diplomatic personnel representing a foreign nation in the U.S., would be considered a U.S. citizen “at birth” or “by birth,” and thus a “natural born Citizen” of the United States, regardless of the citizenship status of that individual’s parents.
Give it up, Vattelists; you lose.
See also:
Georgia Ballot Challenge Ruling
Whatsyourname, You’ve Been Served
Natural Born Citizenship Requirement
CRS Upsets Birthers All Over Again
Congressional Research Service Debunked Birtherism–THE HORROR
Ankeny v. Gov. of Indiana Appeal Transfer: DENIED
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.