Right-Wing Legal Activist Files Paperwork to Deport President Obama

larry-klayman-obamaAfter reading this story, I really tried to avoid the urge to vent out against this stupidity. But then I made the mistake of reading it twice – and I just had to say a few words.


While I know “birthers” still exist, and always will (after all, there are still people who think we faked the mood landing), it really does amaze me how many of them there still are. While this ridiculous movement has clearly died down from its peak around 2009/2010, there still remain a decent chunk of conservative Americans who don’t believe President Obama is actually an American.

Well, right-wing legal activist Larry Klayman has taken this nonsense a step further by filing paperwork with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to get President Obama deported. 

Klayman said:

“No, Obama is not incompetent or ill prepared, as politically correct commentators shade it. The African-American “Muslim in Chief” knows exactly what he is doing, and it is done at the expense of the rest of us. As set forth in a deportation petition I filed just today, it’s time that he be deported back to his native country and for him to leave us alone. He has no legitimacy to be president, and he must be tried, convicted and removed from our shores before he destroys everything the Founding Fathers bequeathed to us.”

Let me start off by saying that his comments don’t sound at all racist – not at all, right? 

That was sarcasm by the way. When I read that all I really saw was someone saying, “I don’t like the fact that a black man is in charge.”

He also went on to say of Obama’s mother that she was, “a multi-cultural adventurer enamored of foreign countries and uninterested in the United States” and “may have relished an authentic African birth more in touch with nature and human history.” 

“In sum, deportation proceedings should be immediately commenced, an investigation undertaken, a full evidentiary hearing held, and Barack Hussein Obama should be removed from the United States,” he concluded.


Birthers are truly a special kind of stupid. Ignoring the fact that they literally have no credible evidence to support their nonsense, they seem to always gloss over the fact that his mother was an American citizen. Even if you want to believe in the asinine conspiracy theory that President Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, he’s still a citizen of the United States because his mother was American. 

It’s the same way that Ted Cruz is an American citizen despite the fact he was born in Canada.

So what grounds would you have to deport him? Absolutely none. 

Barack Obama’s mother was an American, which makes him an American citizen – end of story. But that doesn’t stop these radical right-wing sites like WorldNetDaily (a place where you can commonly find articles written by Ted Nugent) from promoting and praising unstable individuals like Mr. Klayman.

It’s like I’ve said before, it’s really difficult to take conservatives seriously when quite a few of them still believe ridiculous crap like this.



Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • jonjstrine42

    And of course, as soon as this frivolous suit is thrown out (as it should and will be), he’ll be a guest on every show on Fox “News” complaining about the “activist” judges that turned him down.
    Maybe they’ll even come up with a new conspiracy theory as to why his asinine lawsuit was dismissed. They sure could use a new one. The old ones are getting stale.

    • Steve Brains

      Sadly yes, I expect to hear all about the Fox spotlighting this nonsense by noon.

      What’s the progress on Germ Boehner’s suit? Why hasn’t the President filed for a hearing on it’s validity? Made a motion for it’s immediate dismissal. If Germ would spend HALF the effort in he does in sandbagging AMERICA during this Recovery, ON what the voter’s need in their daily lives… We’d be RECOVERED.

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        he DOES spend a lot of time on voters needs
        ======================================
        HIS voting constituency

      • Steve Brains

        That’s his actual JOB. I do NOT think a Representative should be making ANY kind of social policy, ESPECIALLY based on a personal RELIGIOUS dogma. in My world, NO dogma hunts.

        I was experimenting with a script (a hobby, short stories) about a tee shirted political candidate who gives speeches holding a beer and it’s all of three sentences:

        “I am Steve Brains and I want the job of representing you in Congress for the next 2 years. I will do what the majority of you tell Me to do WITHOUT My opinion or a Corporations desires to change what YOU as My district INSTRUCT Me to fight for in Washington. I will take you requests, suggestions and needs online, over the phone in writing or in person so while I am here NOW, what concerns you most today ma’am?”

        Then I listen and someone on my staff takes notes and someone else researches the issue AS IT APPLIES to My District.

        While FRACKING fucks EVERYONE, I helps many and destroys many others. natural gas for cheap is a universal good, poisoned land and water affect the owners. So My weekly mail survey would ask:
        “How do you want Me to represent you in Washington this week?”

        and the list would be the Congressional Agenda plus three current news items that needs legislation.

        The tally of all answers would determine how I proceed.

      • Nemisis

        Could you start with just caps in the conventional manner?

      • Violet G

        It’s all fine and dandy until the majority wants slavery back.

      • Steve Brains

        The PROBLEM darling, is that the MINORITY wants slavery back. The 1% thinks they should OWN people.

      • Channon Doughty

        I would hope that Obama hasn’t filed anything because he doesn’t wish to waste his very important time on such nonsense.

      • Steve Brains

        Is that an Iceberg in your cheek or your tongue? hehehe

      • Channon Doughty

        youthful optimism?

      • Steve Brains

        That’s a LOT of tongue in cheek.

      • mechadave

        The President didn’t counter sue for the same reason he didn’t reveal that he possessed the long form BC until he bitch slapped Donald Trump across the face with it. The President is an attorney, so he doesn’t let the opposition see his hand until the time is right. Let Boehner spin his wheels for a while, because he will just start some other mischief when the lawsuit fails.

      • Steve Brains

        Amen to THAT TRUTH!!! I wasn’t sure anyone ELSE would catch that, but I thought I could fool the buffoons into a fraudulent nonsensical security. ~grins~

      • knoxcat6

        Yes, the President is a VERY smart man. He faked out Rove in 2012 when he (Rove) thought he had bought the election in Ohio!!! I’ll never forget the look on his face when Fox called Ohio for President Obama!!!

      • mechadave

        And the real beauty of that situation was that Obama didn’t even need Ohio to win reelection. In fact, Obama would have got to 270 if Mitt took both Ohio and Florida.

    • Dave B.

      It’s not a lawsuit. It’s just a crank letter he wrote to three DHS officials. It’s no different from somebody writing in and saying they saw Bigfoot crossing the border illegally.

      • jonjstrine42

        Well, if Bigfoot would just go through the legal process and enter this country the right way I wouldn’t have had to report him!
        Sorry… what were we talking about?

      • Richard Mcgee

        Only people believe this guy and
        No one has been killed by Bigfoot yet

      • Dave B.

        Have you read the letter? It’s a hoot.

      • Richard Mcgee

        I know
        I just want my country back
        Can I get an Amen

      • Kathleen Carpenter

        AMEN

      • Charles Bennett

        Problem is, he said he WILL sue if he doesn’t get what he wants. SMH FML.

      • Dave B.

        He already got what he wanted. And if he sues, he’ll get more of it– especially when his complaint gets dismissed.

      • Charles Bennett

        Are you saying he’s doing this for glory?

      • Dave B.

        Well, he might call it glory. Basically it’s attention and notoriety, something that makes him look important to people who would be willing on that basis to provide support for his efforts. He’s not even trying to construct a solid argument– he’s SUPPOSED to fail at this. And then he’ll paint himself as some kind of crusader against a corrupt conspiracy; and the contributions will keep rolling in.

  • Fletcher Mendus

    I think that you are being far too generous calling him a ‘legal activist.’ He left the area of US law a long time ago.

  • Cemetery Girl

    Years ago I worked in a store that got a pretty equal mix of black and white customers. The white customers, there was a good percentage of them that were senior citizens. Some of them were very racist, openly so (although I think that could be a reflection of the fact that so many of the older people in the area had moved from southern states to there to work in factories, so they were raised in open racism.) This legal action reminds me of some of those older white people that would say about some of the other shoppers “I wish they’d just send them back to where they came from…” I once asked where exactly they should be shipped to and after a look like I was an idiot, “the Aftican jungles where they came from!” Working there was a learning experience.

    • Pipercat

      Redd Foxx said it best in one of his routines:

      “Back to Africa with them. Back to Africa with whom? Not me I’ve never been to Africa. Send me back home, send me to St. Louis, Missouri.”

      • Cemetery Girl

        So, Obama gets deported to Hawaii. Hmmm, can I get deported to Hawaii also? I was born in Ohio, still live here, and with winter coming I wouldn’t mind being deported to Hawaii!

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        Ft.Lauderdale is better,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, warmer oceans

      • Cemetery Girl

        I’m sure this is misguided, but I always think party when I think Ft. Lauderdale. Being a Buckeye, my concept of “warm” is skewed. I have swam in the ocean when it was around 60 out, but when you were in 15 degree temps a couple of days before… Still, I can’t really imagine living elsewhere. I hate winter but I like seeing the seasons change. I find flat terrain odd (I’m used to hills). I’m too set in my ways.

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        you would “hate it here— especially with an indigo moonlit sky overlooking a gently lapping ocean — clear verde green– listening to the uneven music of that oceanic breeze rustling through the palm fronds dancing with coconuts
        ===================================
        did I mention lobster? 🙂

      • Cemetery Girl

        I do love the beach, but I can’t imagine living there. Fresh seafood is tempting though 🙂

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        swordfish and tuna; grouper and RED snapper. Sea bass is very overrated and overpriced and over fished. Shrimp are sea cockroaches. crabs? yuk
        =========================================
        swordfish #1

      • Cemetery Girl

        You’re killing me here! Now I really want fresh seafood…

      • Pipercat

        I’d be happy to get deported out of Texas…

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      as soon as FOX “news” Caucasian ‘patriots’ send back the whites to Ireland and Belgium and finland and britain
      ==============================================
      I love white trash regressives

      • Cemetery Girl

        I don’t know about them, but I’m a mix of European (and supposedly some Native American that I haven’t been able to prove.) I’d have to be chopped up to properly send me back.

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        my girlfriend is French and American southwestern indian ( she has brown hair & eyes)
        =====================================
        me? mutt– german French & english
        =================================
        I guess im being deported to Europe. better put me on Riviera as im spoiled with se florida beaches and ocean

      • Cemetery Girl

        I’m a mix of Polish, German, English, and Irish. At least I would probably end up someplace that I can get a strong drink.

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        funny how so many polish jokes abound; yet I have never met a stupid pole! they usually are quite bright- at least the ones I have met
        ================================
        unlike the crybaby misguided trolls ( see: regressive republicans) on these uproarious political blogs!

      • Cemetery Girl

        Just the same old “let’s slap a stereotype on a group of people because they’re competition in the workforce” crap. At this point they’ve pretty much recycled the Polish jokes into blonde jokes.

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        so when can we socially start mocking regressive trolls who pollute these blogs with poorly-spun anecdotes?

      • Cemetery Girl

        That won’t sway opinions though

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        in all the lucid attempts I have made ( along with rebarbative ones) I have NEVER seen an ‘opinion’ swayed or changed.
        it seems blockheadedness is a constant vigil with regressives even when confronted with inescapable FACTS

      • Channon Doughty

        French, English, Dutch, German and Cherokee. But if they wanted to send my Cherokee bits back “home” they’d have to move their sorry asses out of Appalachia first.

      • Channon Doughty

        wouldn’t we all?

      • Cemetery Girl

        Realistically, yep. Even first generation immigrants can show a mixture of heritage.

    • Channon Doughty

      sadly common in the South and, as I learned traveling the country during Obama’s first campaign, everywhere else too.

      • Cemetery Girl

        Very true. At the time I was young, less jaded. It is everywhere, but at the time I was surprised by the nerve of saying it in earshot of the people they were talking about. Now it doesn’t, but it once did. Working there really was a learning experience about the good and the bad in people.

    • This is/was not confined to people from the south. My Great-Aunt Lila, b. 1901 WI, was telling us about her pharmacist about 20 years ago. She said that he was quite nice, for being black. What she said surprised me as none of our family was from the south whatsoever.

      • Cemetery Girl

        I think we forget that the whole country has had race problems. (I know I don’t always remember.) In the South it was the law, but in the North and other areas there was racism and seperation, but it came from attitudes and policies instead of laws. It makes it easier for other regions to feel like race wasn’t an issue (“hey, our part of the country didn’t make laws seperation people”), but it really wasn’t much different. The South was open about it. They had laws and were open about racism. The North held quiet attitudes that created seperations also. Not every single person in the North, but enough of them.

  • Why5ks

    And tied up in the racism and ignorance of these statements by a lawyer whose sightlines are obstructed by his butt cheeks is one undeniable fact. Even if President Obama was a Muslim, “his mother was multi-cultural adventurer enamored of foreign countries”, or he was a Socialist there is nothing illegal about any of those things. None of those things would disqualify him from being President. And don’t try to come back with the line, “well he never admitted it when he ran for office so he lied to the American people.” Every politician in Washington has an agenda which is to get reelected and to get the best possible committee seats that they can get. They all kiss the asses of those who donate money and their party leadership. They tell all the voters exactly what they think will get them elected and then turn around and do whatever they can to get reelected, regardless of what they said to get elected.

    • Channon Doughty

      sad, but true. :'(

  • LaurenV

    I think this weirdo knows the truth and is just making this shit up to see how far he can go with it. People should be fined for frivolous lawsuits. That would reducevthem

    • Channon Doughty

      brilliant idea!!

    • ditomagik

      I also think that many people don’t consider Hawaii part of America, and would never approve of an Hawaiin president of color. Very often those who yell the loudest are really not stating the real reason for that yelling. For me the way many people outwardly treat our President is shameful.. I did not like President Reagan but I never acted in any way that was not respectful to our highest office. This country choose him to do the job, and he is doing it. When I see the things people say and do, I am so ashamed of how we as a nation represent ourselves to the rest of the world.

  • Bruce Wayne

    Wait is he paying for this lawsuit out of his own pocket or is he wasting taxpayer money for this ridiculous non-sense. I think the problem here is there are no real repercussions to his actions. How bout this, if you use your own money, do what you have to do, but if you use tax payer money to fight this moronic battle, when you lose, you have to deport yourself.

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      superb –I made same statement months ago for Darrell Issa ( very wealthy) to privately fund the useless Benghazi committee

      • Steve Brains

        Don’t forget the multi MILLIONDOLLAR road show where he staged an investigation in townhalls all over the country. He subpoenaed the actors, limited the cast of characters to ONLY those anti Obama “experts” on something they admittedly know NOTHING about.

        If they KNEW anything, why are they still hunting snipe?

    • Gary Smith

      He has to pay for some parts of it, but if it makes it to court (doubtful) he’ll be wasting taxpayer money used to fund the justice system by further clogging the courts with his groundless idiocy.

      • Cemetery Girl

        He should have to pay a large fee for something so frivolous. The American people shouldn’t have to pay for this nonsense.

      • Dave B.

        All he did was write a crank letter to some DHS officials. He had to pay postage. That’s about it.

      • MrLightRail

        Congressmen have franking privileges, so that letter was sent on the taxpayer’s dime.

      • Dave B.

        What the heck are you talking about?

    • Steve Brains

      MOst likely just the $15 filing fee. He is his own Atty. and this obamahate is his personal hobby (lobby).

      • Dave B.

        He didn’t file anything.

    • Nemisis

      I would like to see this guy fund everything he is asking for out of his own pocket. When all is said and done, he gets a ribbon for his chest that says how much he spent to be told. “President Obama is still Hawaiian and still not going to be deported.” He can then feel that he has done his civic duty of entertaining the masses.

    • Dave B.

      There’s no lawsuit.

    • mechadave

      The article says Klayman wrote a letter to immigration. Stop the presses! I’m sure they will “get back to him on that.” In other words, the letter will get the consideration is deserves. Probably will end up tacked to the break room bulletin board for the amusement of all.

  • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

    to help my dear friend and internet ally IVAN the RENKO see things properly ( thru is tear-filled eyes) allow me to again give praise to:
    ” WHITE TRASH REGRESSIVE RELIGIOUS REPUBLICANS”
    ==================================================
    anyone EVER notice that the usual regressive scumbag trolls on these progressive threads N..E..V..E..R.. seem to comment upon the incredible stupidity of these seemingly quotidian republican self immolations?

  • robingee

    >> The African-American “Muslim in Chief” <<<

    Oh, dear. Honey, lie down. Put a cool cloth on your head. You're ill.

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      another patriotic ( idiotic) white trash republican religious scumbag,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, November elections coming: shall we continue to have these anti-American tea ( bag) party types around?

  • cravin moorehead

    Why, you fucking idiot.

    His mother is an American Citizen.

    That makes HIM an American Citizen.

    Deport John McCain or Ted Cruz. It’s the SAME THING!

    • strayaway

      I unfortunately have never heard any evidence that Obama was born anywhere but Hawaii. However, if you or the author were more up on birther studies, you would have remembered that, as birthers tell it, at the time of Obama’s birth, Stanley was too young to claim her son as a US citizen had he actually been born abroad. Superstar attorneys Lawrence tribe and Ted Olson decided, however, that McCain and Obama were both good because their mothers were US citizens.

      • cravin moorehead

        “Unfortunately”……That says it all, tool.

        You are pathetic.

      • strayaway

        What’s the matter, did you have to look up Lawrence Tribe and and Ted Olson? It follows that Ted Cruz, according to their opinion, would also be covered.

      • cravin moorehead

        Pathetic.

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        non sequitur to your comment start and cravins subsequent reply
        ====================================

      • Dave B.

        Tribe and Olson weren’t concerned with Obama’s eligibility. There was no reason for them to be.

      • strayaway

        Perhaps, but this was before any sort of birth certificate had been issued, they covered each others’ candidates’ backs. Considering their legal stature, who was going to second guess them?

        In support of Obama’s legitimacy from their jointly signed letter, ““Historical practice confirms that birth on soil that is under the sovereignty of the United States, but not within a State, satisfies the Natural Born Citizen Clause….And Senator Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961–not long after its admission to the Union on August 21, 1959. We find it inconceivable that Senator Obama would have been ineligible for the Presidency had he been born two years earlier. ”

      • Dave B.

        Tribe and Olson weren’t speaking “In support of Obama’s legitimacy,” they were using Obama as an example to support McCain’s legitimacy, alongside the examples of Vice President Charles Curtis and Senator Barry Goldwater. They were merely stating a fact, not constructing an argument on Obama’s behalf. Their presumption is that not only is Obama UNDOUBTEDLY eligible, he would have been eligible if he’d been born in the Territory of Hawaii before statehood; just as Curtis, born in Kansas Territory was, and just as Goldwater, born in Arizona Territory was.
        They didn’t say one word about Obama acquiring US citizenship through his mother– and rightly so, because they surely knew he would not have done so.

      • strayaway

        Yeah, right, Democratic superstar lawyer Lawrence Tribe who didn’t quite make it to the Supreme Court shows up to help Ted Olson make McCain look good. That’s implausible. Read the quote. it is about Hawaii not Panama. It is about Obama not McCain. Remember, Obama was still playing games and hadn’t released any sort of a birth certificate yet.

        They did say some words about everyone acquiring citizenship through their parents.

        “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens:”

        “Once again, no matter the birth place of John McCain or any other child born of U.S. parents, whether born beyond sea, in or out of the limits of the United States territory – the natural born child of U.S. parents “shall be considered as natural born citizens.”

        Seems like “any child” includes Obama if ‘parents’ can mean parent.

      • Dave B.

        Implausible, my eye. That memo had NO OTHER PURPOSE than to rationalize Senator McCain’s eligibility. For crying out loud, read the first and last sentences of the memo if you can’t read the whole thing. And I don’t know what the heck you think you’re reading, because your “Once again” quote doesn’t come from the Tribe/Olson memo. It comes from a birther opinion piece by J. B. Williams; a well-informed and knowledgeable person wouldn’t make that unqualified statement. In the actual memo, Obama is mentioned only in passing; his eligibility wasn’t in doubt among rational people.

      • strayaway

        So, in your understanding, Lawrence Tribe was working for McCain gratis and rational people are those who agree with you. My point of bringing this up was that the Tribe-Olson opinion helped put those you don’t agree with to rest; that having a US mother superseded other considerations with regard to being natural born.

      • Dave B.

        It’s pretty obvious you haven’t read the memo. For example, your “Once again” quote comes, as I’ve pointed out, not from the Tribe/Olson memo but from a birther opinion piece. And the REALLY goofy part is that article tries to make the case that Barack Obama is NOT a natural born citizen. DUH!
        How about you actually read the real memo, and THEN talk about what it says?

      • strayaway

        I’ll stand by my last statement that you seem incredibly naive to believe that Lawrence Tribe was playing this role with no consideration of the accusations and situation that Obama was in at the time.

      • Dave B.

        And I’ll stand by mine that you don’t have a clue of what you’re talking about, and you won’t until you actually read the memo. If then.
        Exactly what “accusations and situation that Obama was in at the time” are you talking about?

      • strayaway

        Dave the Naive, This article has to do with birthers. Birthers were claiming Obama was born in Kenya and that Stanley wasn’t of age to transfer citizenship when little Barrack was born. Meanwhile, Obama was said to have spent over $1M on lawyers to prevent his birth certificate and other information from surfacing. His first act as the most transparent president ever was to sign an executive order hiding some of his personal records. It wasn’t until much later that a birth certificate was produced. Why the expensive drama when he could have just produced a birth certificate earlier on?

      • Dave B.

        Does the phrase “at the time” have no significance to you? Most of what you’re recounting wasn’t anywhere in the picture when the Tribe/Olson memo came out. And I can’t tell if you’re just listing birther claims or stating your own. Which is it?

      • strayaway

        At the time = The Hillary campaign started the birther movement in March 2013.

      • Dave B.

        So I take it then that “at the time” has NO significance to you– considering the date you chose is five years AFTER the Tribe/Olson memo came out. Duh.

      • strayaway

        Oops, sorry naive one. My previous post should have read “March 2008”. That’s when there was a Hillary campaign battling Obama. The opinion was issued in March 2008 also.

      • Dave B.

        How do you figure the Hillary campaign “started the birther movement”?

      • strayaway

        The first charges that Obama was not a natural born citizen emerged in the Spring of 2008 from within the Hillary campaign.

      • Dave B.

        Feel free to try and provide a reference to “the Hillary campaign” making such “charges.”

      • It was dropped very quickly because it was nonsense.

        However, a follower of Hillary, Phillip Berg took the ball and tried to run with it. He is still trying to convince people that the USSC will be hearing his case against Obama, even though there isn’t a case. Just as Orly Taitz is still claiming that the USSC will be hearing her case.

      • strayaway

        The first claims that Barack Obama was not a natural citizen, that I am aware of, emerged from the Hillary campaign in the spring of 2008.

      • “Birthers were claiming Obama was born in Kenya and that Stanley wasn’t of age to transfer citizenship when little Barrack was born.”

        Except that Obama was born in Hawaii, which means that it doesn’t matter where his parents were born.

        “Meanwhile, Obama was said to have spent over $1M on lawyers to prevent his birth certificate and other information from surfacing.”

        Whoever was saying this was wrong. And there is no verifiable evidence that proves that he had done anything of the kind.

        “His first act as the most transparent president ever was to sign an executive order hiding some of his personal records.”

        LOL His first EO was nothing of the sort. Have you even looked it up? It had nothing, whatsoever, to do with any personal records at all. It had to do with Administration records, and it reversed an EO that Bush had issued that said that anyone within the Administration, or their families, could withhold any information for any reason at any time. The EO that Obama issued reverted it back to the National Archives to determine what was released, and when. It had nothing to do with personal, private papers or information.

        “It wasn’t until much later that a birth certificate was produced.”

        Wrong. Obama showed the public, when he had no legal reason to do so, the replacement bc issued to him by Hawaii. And he did this in early 2008.

        For some unknown reason, the birthers decided that the certified bc that Obama showed was not valid (iow, they were idiots) and kept demanding that the long form (that Hawaii hadn’t issued for years) be produced. Finally, because this nonsense was not going away, he sent to Hawaii and requested the original copy of the Health department registration. Even then, common sense was bypassed and people picked that one apart, also.

        And, btw, NONE of Obama’s records were sealed because they did not need to be sealed. School records had not been public since 1974. That was a Federal Law, btw. Vital record access is set by the State. In Hawaii, it is 75 years. Passport records are not public until the National Archives releases them.

      • strayaway

        I think the preponderance of evidence suggests that little Barack was born in Hawaii. I was trying to explain to Dave some of the nuances of the birther movement.

        Obama essentially restored the wording of Executive Order 12667, by repeating most of the text of that order with minor changes. One notable change is that vice presidential records are explicitly covered by his new order. See Executive Order 13489 of January 21, 2009

        Thank you for making the point that the most transparent president did not release his college records.

      • Why should Obama have released his college records? No other President has. Bush’s were leaked. He did not release them.

        “Thank you for making the point that the most transparent president did not release his college record”

        School records have not been public since 1974. What part of this do you not understand?

      • strayaway

        But candidate Obama promised to be the most transparent president. Then he acted like Bush. I understand what transparent means. Obama lied.

      • “Remember, Obama was still playing games and hadn’t released any sort of a birth certificate yet.”

        Obama had released to the public, when he definitely did not have to, a certified copy of his birth certificate already. It was issued in the same way that anyone’s bc was issued when he sent for a replacement copy. Computer generated, just as all the bc’s in all 50 states are now issued.

        He was not playing games at all. He had already shown the certified copy of his birth certificate. Nothing else was legally needed to show that he was born in Hawaii and was legally a candidate for President.

      • strayaway

        You’re partly correct. Obama released a shorter, legally binding “certification of live birth” in 2008. In 2011, he released a copy of his original long-form birth certificate. I was surprised that his long certificate didn’t have his footprint on it but apparently Hawaii didn’t do that then. The purpose of releasing the long form was to quiet birthers. It pretty well served its purpose in quelling the birther movement. Had he just shown it earlier, he could have ended the discussion earlier. Hence:games. I’m more curious about why he was allowed to attend a Muslims only school in Indonesia, if he gained entrance to Occidental University as a foreign student, and how it was that he travelled to Pakistan in his college days when it was illegal for Americans to do so. I don’t think he is a Muslim since there has never been any evidence that he is and he attended that nutty preacher’s church for awhile but it would be interesting to find out those other details. Unfortunately “the most transparent president” ever sealed his records as his first executive order. Sigh.

      • “I’m more curious about why he was allowed to attend a Muslims only school in Indonesia”

        He attended a public Muslim school for 2 years in Indonesia, and a Catholic school in Indonesia for 2 years in Indonesia.

        The rest of your post is bringing up issues that have already been laid to rest by using evidence to disprove them. I suggest that you look them up. You are getting false information from your current news organization.

      • strayaway

        Per your advice, I just looked into Snopes and Factcheck out of curiosity. They together make a good case that Pakistan was open to US travelers in 1981 when Obama took a three week vacation there after visiting his mother in Indonesia. There was nothing more that I could come up with than a travel advisory which doesn’t stop Americans from travel.

      • Dave B.

        Oh– and as far as “who was going to second guess them,” a LOT of scholars did so. The Tribe/Olson argument that birth in the Canal Zone made Senator McCain a natural born citizen is pretty weak.

      • strayaway

        Agreed, but these guys have gravitas in the beltway.

    • Dave B.

      It’s never been true that every child born to a US citizen parent, whether father or mother, will be born a US citizen. If President Obama had been born outside the US, its outlying possessions, or the Panama Canal Zone, he would have been eligible for automatic or expeditious naturalization, but he wouldn’t have been born a US citizen.

  • CharlieAdamsInKY

    My position is simple: Larry Klansman, every last “birther” imbecile, and the entire TeaPubliKKKlan TREASON Party, should have their citizenship revoked, and be given a one-way ticket to whatever FIFTH-world hellhole will actually lower themselves to take the verminous scumbags. With a permanent Open Season and bounty on any that should ever try to re-enter the United States.

    • Gary Smith

      No.

      Y’know why? Because we don’t stoop to their type of loathsome behavior.

      • Steve Brains

        Because we didn’t STOP it on Jan 22, 2009

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      or to texas; allowing texas to secede–
      wouldn’t that be cool? having TEXAS deal with its immigration situations with OUT US govt help?
      RICK PERRY king/ TED CRUUUUUZ court jester and defense minister

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      I would rather have them on CROSSFIRE to explain(???) how and where they get their “facts”

      • Steve Brains

        They wouldn’t Dare be bested on national Television by a lesbian now? Would they?

        GO!!! RACHEL!!!

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        lets get Rachel and olbermann together against oreilly and “judge” pirro,,,,,,,,,,,,, then we get Lawrence Odonnell and ed schultz VS Hannity and huck(ster)abee
        ======================================
        glorious!! I would pay to see that weekly!

      • Steve Brains

        Do you think Matthews is past his prime and ready to (BOL) to be put out to stud? LMAO!

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        olbermann was the guy I watched when I first started watching msnbc and fox “news” to gather info; I was neutral and now– after watching those channels its pretty easy to see who is telling the truth WAAAAY more often. I remember the days of idiot glenn beck- and I wish olbermann was back as he kept oreilly in line

      • Steve Brains

        I used to love him. He annoyed me at time But “I;m Keith Olbermann and it’s been Three Tousand nine Hundred Forty-Two days since the ‘Mission Accomplished”.

      • Steve Brains

        How often do you watch Fox. I hit it for a half a session about 5 times a week, depending on my schedule.

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        watch it at gym on overhead TV when using stationary cycles– they have several TVs and have MSNBC right nest to FOX so its fun watching them chatter. Its tough watching idiots such as pirro and huck(setr)abee as they are the worst. NO facts at all; rampant idiocy sprinkled with voodoo( religion) from the good pastor mike. O’reilly is ONLY one with anything to say; but he is pretty bad also

      • glogrrl

        I never watch Faux Noise…..but when I do, it’s on Comedy Central.

      • Steve Brains

        That DOES give it a realistic framework to be viewed in.

      • glogrrl

        You have no idea.

    • Channon Doughty

      tempting, but alas, they’d do the same to us as soon as they got the chance

  • proud2beDem

    If the republicans have been so smart and know what they are doing in our government then how in the hell did Obama get to be president anyway ???? There was a republican in office when Obama was vetted ,did they not do there job to let this terrible man become president , are the American people that stupid to not listen to the truth ??? I just have to shake my head , roll my eyes and double face palm on this one !!!

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      its all part of the secular muslim liberal communist/socialist/ Nazi/ martian kenyan conspiracy to have “Obama get your guns”

  • Robin S Summertown

    Birthers are truly a special kind of stupid.

    That one statement says it all.

  • Even if the President practiced Islam, Klayman needs to go back and read Article VI of the US Constitution.

    • Steve Brains

      Is this the same Klayman that was burning Koran’s in Alabama or other godless and forsaken place?

      • MikeHaas82

        No – I believe the spelling of the other guy, a “preacher”, was Clayman.

      • Steve Brains

        Thanks. but they could be twins of different mothers right?

  • What we need is a bill introduced in the Senate to make anti-American provocateurs like Klayman financially liable for frivolous claims and lawsuits. If you make a claim citing myths and fabrications, than you can be sued by the government. Basically, it would modify libel and defamation laws against elected officials with the burden of proof being on the claimant. Yeah, yeah, First Amendment ramifications be damned, I am sick to death of having the media give these seditious creeps a platform without any consequences. Klayman just plain needs his ass kicked.

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      I donnnnnn’ think regressive republicans would vote 4 that
      ===============================================
      might put FOX “news” and glenn beck out of business

    • Steve Brains

      Criminally liable for activities that slander the NAME of the united States. Which in every square inch of the earth is “Mr. President.”

      • I have no idea what you just said….however, “every square inch of the earth” seems a bit of a hyperbole. Could it be just the ground directly under your buttocks?…which is like 8 square feet max.

      • Steve Brains

        I meant, in every square inch of the earth, slandering the President is Slandering the Country and you are thus criminally liable for that, even on the North pole.

        My apologies for non moren phrasing. I was reading an Atlantic article from 1863 and got wrapped up in the style of prose.

        I will proofread more better in the soon. LOL

      • Steve Brains

        GOD I hope not!!! That is 144 Sq Inches short of a SQAURE YARD!!!!

        We ARE only counting the part of the buttocks that actually contact the seat, not the overlap? BOL!

  • Steve Brains

    More than any, this guy DESERVES Guantanamo. This is outright treason against the Government (which includes any twice elected president) and the this is clearly aiding and abetting the enemies of the United States.

    It SHAMES this Nation for the President to have tolerated all this like Jackie Robinson. President Obama is NOT the first mixed breed person in politics in the nation and within 3 decades, whites will be come the minority. Mr Robinson’s purpose in show that Negro men were not only better athletes than White men, but had far superior character than 99% his White inferiors.

    Mr Obama , from Jan 22, 2009, should NEVER have tolerated this kind of racism. All his complacency has done is INCREASE racial tension and motivation in America. Do you REALLY think Ferguson would have ever FARED happen if The President had come right out front and stopped the first SOTU address and askedMr Wilson to explain himself in front of the entire Nation.

    What would the coward have said?

    But it would have set a precedent for EVERY OTHER person who thought they were better than the President of the united States. Every time a Joe Arpaio or some other jackass like this one stands up and spits on his Nation’s CHOSEN ONE and gets away with it… it FUELS racism.

    Do you think Darryl Wilson would have had the courage to fire10 rounds at an unarmed black guy and miss 4 times in anger. I bet his qualification targets are all in the black!!!! (PUN INTENDED!)

    The ISIS monkeys are laughing at our Nation because of the HATE the REDS show daily, broadcast WORLDWIDE WITH IMPUNITY, to the President. They MAKE him impotent through their obstructionism. Which is what the world sees, inside out borders and out. They then take action based on that.

    So WHAT is AMERICA gonna do about this gutter swilling barf bag of a lawyer?

    • Channon Doughty

      nothing, I fear

    • Sherri G

      so what you’re blaming President Obama for being neutral because if he had come out against it then all the lights would have been up in arms claiming that he was biased against white and it just would have been reversed neither way would have worked for him which is why he kept quiet

  • alex

    The irony is that his competitor in 08 John Mccain; Not born in America …. He was born in Panama

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      but—————————-
      ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the regressive trash rightwing is OK with that as McCain is WHITE and has an easy2 pronounce AMERICAN-sounding name

      • glogrrl

        McCain is Irish, not American.

    • Sherri G

      on a US military base to American parents….hate the guy Bhutan facts are facts. my son was 5 weeks shy of being born in a German hospital because my now ex husband and I were stationed in Germany at a base too far from an American Hospital being born over there he would have had dual citizenship American and German at the age of 18 he would have had to decide which one he wanted

      • Dave B.

        Birth on a US military base abroad never made ANYBODY a US citizen. Nobody who acquires US citizenship at birth has to choose at the age of 18, or do ANYTHING, to retain it. Germany only confers German nationality on persons born in Germany to alien parents if one of the parents has been in Germany legally for at least eight years and has a permanent right of residence, or has had an unlimited residence permit for three years. That’s only been in effect since 2000.

      • Sherri G

        Guess what? This was in 1990/1991 and we were provided the paperworking stating the above when I found out I was pregnant….and YES, he would have had dual citizenship just like Cruz did for having American mother and Canadian birth. IF one parent is AMERICAN and a child is born on an American Base, they would either have American status or dual status depending on the country. IF BOTH parents are American then the child is considered a US citizen because the base is “American soil”.

      • Dave B.

        Well, whatever recollections you may have, they don’t change the law.

        For purposes of citizenship, US military bases and diplomatic facilities abroad are indistinguishable from the surrounding territory. A person who would not acquire US citizenship at birth OUTSIDE the facility will not acquire US citizenship at birth INSIDE the facility. The same law applies in either location.
        US military bases abroad are foreign soil under shared jurisdiction as outlined by the applicable status of forces agreement. US diplomatic installations abroad are foreign soil which may be protected by immunities granted under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

        The German government states flat out that “If you were born in Germany prior to January 1, 2000 and neither of your
        parents was German at the time of your birth, then you did NOT acquire
        German citizenship then!”

      • Sherri G

        Really so whatever paperwork and conversations I had with military staff regarding this topic at the time was all bullshit? NOT! You think what you want BUT I EXPERIENCED IT SO LEAVE ME ALONE. CONVERSATION DONE.

      • Dave B.

        I didn’t say anything about any paperwork and conversations you had over twenty years ago. But I will say now you either didn’t understand it or you don’t recall correctly. Whatever you may THINK you experienced, the US State Department and the German government say different.

        Apparently I can’t post links here, which is really too bad, because there’s a great big whopping error in the article that should be properly addressed. Be that as it may, on page 5 of the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual 7 FAM 1110, “Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship By Birth in the United States” , which can easily found by searching for its designator and title, you will find

        “Birth on U.S. Military Base Outside of the United States or Birth on U.S. Embassy or Consulate Premises Abroad:

        (1) Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities abroad 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 born in the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.

        (2) The status of diplomatic and consular premises arises from the rules of law relating to immunity from the prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction of the receiving State; the premises are not part of the territory of the United States of America.”

        A search for “German missions in the United States visa passport & legal” will take you to the German Embassy’s index page, where you can click on “Citizenship” and find the EXACT quote I already provided.

      • MikeHaas82

        Folks, folks – calm down. The sad fact is, wherein Obama being born in Hawaii covers him Constitutionally, regardless of his Mother’s status, its a lot more tricky with Cruz and McCain. As far as having an American parent is concerned – this is where we get into trouble with acknowledging Ted Cruz and John McCain as being US citizens. In their respective situations, they both rely on not-to-firmly established case law. Technically speaking, neither of them enjoyed automatic citizenship. However, given precedent, if Cruz for example were taken to court, he’d *likely* win due to previous case law and precedent. There’s also a slim chance he would LOSE and that is litigation I wouldn’t mind spending my tax dollars on to see it play out.

      • Dave B.

        Uh, neither Cruz’s citizenship nor McCain’s depend on case law at all; and Cruz’s citizenship was beyond doubt “automatic” at birth. It’s rock-solid statutory law. The issues with Senator McCain are a bit different; depending on the interpretation of the statute in effect on the date of his birth in 1936, he may or may not have been born a US citizen at all. A subsequent statute settled that issue, but there’s no case law at all on that particular question.

      • MikeHaas82

        Cruz was born in Alberta, Canada to an American mother. That does not – or did not years ago, qualify him as an American. I won’t argue that current interpretation of later rulings says he is.

      • Dave B.

        It did, and does, “qualify him as an American.” There’s no “interpretation” to it– the statute unambiguously made him a US citizen.

      • glogrrl

        Potential presidential candidates whose eligibility is questioned

        Ted Cruz

        Ted Cruz (born 1970), a Republican United States Senator from Texas, has publicly expressed interest in running for president in the 2016 United States presidential election.[113][114] Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada,[115] to a “U.S. citizen mother and a Cuban immigrant father”.[116] Although there are some uncertainties about the exact definition of “natural born citizen”, Professor Chin (see above) believes that Cruz likely qualifies for the office.[116]

      • alex

        Yeah but you are not getting it. Obama had an American Parent as well, which makes him an American citizen no matter where he was born. But the fact is he was born in Hawaii.

      • Dave B.

        Having an American parent doesn’t make somebody an American citizen; and Barack Obama is one example of a person who wouldn’t have acquired US citizenship at birth abroad, in spite of having a US citizen parent. I don’t know why people insist on going outside the facts to make some fictional foreign-born Obama who doesn’t even exist eligible for the presidency.

      • alex

        The fact is he was born in hawaii so it was a moot issue, and if that is the case, why was mccain nominated? he was born in panama.

      • Dave B.

        I didn’t nominate him.

      • alex

        That is total BS. Of course Obama was born in Hawaii, but than that begs the question, why did the GOP nominate a foreign born John Mccain if they thought being born in a foreign country disqualifies you to be president. It really is silly…. if your parent is American, that makes you an American citizen no matter where you are born. You could be born in North Korea; it does not matter..

      • Dave B.

        If you want to know why the GOP does anything, you’d probably be a lot better off asking the GOP than asking me. And I suggest you study up a bit on US nationality law, because it’s never, ever been true that every child born to a US citizen parent will be born a US citizen. Have you even bothered to look?

      • Sherri G

        I wasnt arguing about my President. I KNOW HE IS AMERICAN in heart and soul…. but pointing out military base births and citizenship.

  • Charlie123

    Why is this guy so eager to have Joe Bidena s President?

    • Channon Doughty

      cuz he’s white?

    • Cemetery Girl

      I have wondered this also, and the only conclusion I can think of is either they are unaware of who would be next or they think they can somehow reinvent the order. Maybe claim that since they believe Obama shouldn’t have been president that Biden shouldn’t have been Vice President, thus voiding his place in the order? They don’t want Biden anymore than anyone else does.

  • Joe DiPuccio

    You don’t have to deport someone to send them from Washington DC back to Hawaii !! This guy needs to be removed if he doesn’t know that Hawaii is a State !!!

  • Lauren

    What a punishment. Who WOULDN’T want to be deported to Hawaii? Where can I sign up?

    • Channon Doughty

      me too!!

  • Channon Doughty

    If we have to keep Ted Cruz, these idiots have to keep Obama. Sorry for that reality check wing-nuts.

    • Avatar

      Ted Cruz has done more damage to U.S. that President wouldn’t even do that to us. Cruz’s governmental shutdown and Cruz sponsored only one successful legislation was to ban someone from entering U.S. and nothing else. Now Cruz are promoting second government shutdown and attempt to inject himself as majority leader if Republicans take the Senate while oust McConnell at same time.

      Cruz is completely drunken with power and doesn’t act like its burden to him.

      • Channon Doughty

        You are so right. To top all that off, he is a Koch puppet, put in power to do their bidding. Scarier than Hell, man!

      • Channon Doughty

        and so drunk with power he continually speaks against his own kind – Hispanics. His real name has nothing to do with “Ted” = Rafael Edward Cruz. F-ing hypocrite

      • Dave B.

        That “real name” business is just plain goofy, as Ted Kennedy would probably be quick to point out.

      • Channon Doughty

        perhaps. But given his venomous speech towards hispanic immigrants, I think it is significant.

      • “Ted” is a common nickname for Edward.

  • poppaDavid

    The courts have the authority to disbar lawyers who file frivolous suits. I hope that happens to any lawyer involved with this stupidity.

  • Jim Bean

    An exercise in futility. No other country would take him.

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      cruz? JIMBO is correct!!
      ==========================================

  • GenerallyConfused

    Ummm..If he isn’t American, why would this guy call him “African American”. Me thinks the guy is very confused.. or trolling birthers everywhere

  • Nemisis

    Wait a minute, I thought President Obama was Hawaiian.

    • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

      Hawaii is part of Kenya,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
      according to texas/tea party/ regressive schoolbooks

      • Nemisis

        Hang, on a sec. I need to update my maps. I sure wish there was a guy around here that worked with maps. Maybe figure out how to refold them. Kenya…that’s just a left turn at Albuquerque right?

      • gian keys LOVES shemale porn

        bugs bunny- my comedic hero!!!

      • Nemisis

        been waiting a month to work that phrase in

    • He is a US citizen born in Hawaii.

      • Nemisis

        So I am right….he does like pineapple.

  • Brian

    Wow, that’s unbelievably low, racist, and insane.

  • Willie Wilson Jr

    Another rightwing idiot

  • mechadave

    Klayman alternately claims that Obama’s Mom traveled to Kenya for the birth, then seamlessly goes to the imaginary Indonesian adoption by his stepfather. Although there is zero evidence that either the Kenyan trip or the adoption took place, Klayman’ stories are absurd because neither event would cause the President’s American citizenship to change. And, in the words of Hillary Clinton, “What difference does it make?” The President will finish his second term regardless of frivolous and absurd legal challenges.

    • Dave B.

      Well, the imaginary Kenyan trip would have; but there is, as you say, no evidence that it ever took place. Not to mention the fact that the trip itself is just absurdly implausible, and that the President’s Kenyan family all confirm that he was born in Hawaii.

      • mechadave

        And, assuming the young Ann Dunham Obama did make the trek to Kenya, where is the record of her passport, or the Visa that Great Britain would have required?

      • Dave B.

        Beats me. I’m not the one indulging the birthers here. I don’t try to come up with an imaginary eligibility to match the imaginary Kenyan birth. I just rely on the fact that the President was born in Hawaii.

      • mechadave

        No, the Kenyan trip would not have affected anything. The Republicans are claiming that Ted Cruz is natural born even though he was born in Canada.

      • Dave B.

        The imaginary Kenyan trip most certainly would have affected the imaginary Kenyan-born Obama’s US citizenship. Ann Dunham Obama couldn’t have transmitted US citizenship to a child born in Kenya on August 4, 1961.

      • mechadave

        On that issue, your bubble gum wrapper law degree has failed you.

      • Dave B.

        On that issue, I’ve actually bothered to look and see what the law was at the time. What a novel concept. Maybe you’d want to try that?

      • mechadave

        Obviously you didn’t understand what you read. You couldn’t be more wrong.

      • Dave B.

        I assure you, I understand it quite well. Do you even know what law would’ve applied to the fictional Kenyan birth?

      • dunstvangeet

        What Dave is saying is that if he was born outside the United States, he would not be a U.S. Citizen because Stanley Ann Dunham was too young. At the time, U.S. Law stipulated that in order for someone who was born to one U.S. Citizen and one Foreigner outside of the United States, you needed to have been a resident of the United States for 10 years, 5 of them after the age of 14. What the argument is that because Stanley Ann Dunham was only 18 years old when Obama was born, she hadn’t actually gotten the requirement of 5 years after the age of 14 (which would have required her to be at least 19).

        It would be interesting to test that out to see what courts would have said to someone who gave birth, who had spent 99.999% of their time inside the United States, and the only reason that the person would not be eligible is because the mother is too young. It would be interesting to see the court discussing two situations of the following: one woman 18 years, 364 days in the United States who in the middle of a vacation, gives birth. And a woman who’s 19 years old in the same situation. According to Dave’s argument, one of them would be a citizen, while the other one would not.

        I’m not as convinced as Dave that the court would rule that Obama wasn’t a citizen just because his mother was too young to transmit citizenship.

        But this is all an academic exercise anyways, since Obama was born in Hawaii.

      • Dave B.

        Well, it’s not my argument; it’s the plain language of the law– Congress exercising its exclusive power to naturalize. A court can’t decide to just ignore the statutory requirement because it doesn’t like a particular outcome. As Judge Pooler of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals pointed out in Hizam v. Kerry,

        “A person born outside of the United States becomes a citizen at birth only if the circumstances of birth satisfy the statutory requirements in effect at the time of application,”

        and

        “Well-settled case law bars a court from exercising its equity powers to naturalize citizens.”
        Congress has already provided a remedy for persons who don’t acquire US citizenship at birth in spite of having a US citizen parent. Why would a court feel compelled to wander outside its jurisdiction to provide another?

      • dunstvangeet

        Take a look at the case of Perkins v. Elg. The law plainly said that through the treaty that anybody accepting Sweedish Citizenship gave up their U.S. Citizenship. The Supreme Court modified this rule to say that one has to give up their citizenship voluntarily, and Ms. Elg did not do it voluntarily. I have a feeling that someone who was in this exact same situation (say someone who was born on vacation, who was born outside the United States to a U.S. Citizen parent, returned the next month to the United States, and then continued living there, without their parents ever filling out the requisite Naturalization paperwork) would get a ruling that they were a citizen all along.

      • Dave B.

        I don’t think Perkins v. Elg is much help here. The underlying statutes and treaties weren’t challenged. What the DC Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court both relied upon was what Chief Justice Hughes said

        “has long been a recognized principle in this country that if a child born here is taken during minority to the country of his parents’ origin, where his parents resume their former allegiance, he does not thereby lose his citizenship in the United States provided that on attaining majority he elects to retain that citizenship and to return to the United States to assume its duties.”

        Chief Justice Hughes went on to cite numerous rulings, summing up that they

        “leave no doubt of the controlling principle long recognized by this Government. That principle, while administratively applied, cannot properly be regarded as a departmental creation independently of the law. It was deemed to be a necessary consequence of the constitutional provision by which persons born within the United States and subject to its jurisdiction become citizens of the United States. To cause a loss of that citizenship in the absence of treaty or statute having that effect, there must be voluntary action and such action cannot be attributed to an infant whose removal to another country is beyond his control and who during minority is incapable of a binding choice.”

        Regarding the treaty with Sweden, Hughes said,

        “nothing is said in the treaty which in such a case would destroy the right of election which appropriately belongs to the child on attaining majority.”

        Regarding the statute upon which the government relied, Hughes said,

        “We think that the statute was aimed at a voluntary expatriation and we find no evidence in its terms that it was intended to destroy the right of a native citizen, removed from this country during minority, to elect to retain the citizenship acquired by birth and to return here for that purpose. If by virtue of derivation from the citizenship of one’s parents a child in that situation can be deemed to have been naturalized under the foreign law, still we think in the absence of any provision to the contrary that such naturalization would not destroy the right of election.”

        Hughes went on to say that exercise of the right of election

        “should not be deemed to be inconsistent with either treaty or statute.”

        He added further that no statute had been enacted

        “providing that persons in the situation of the respondent here have lost the American citizenship which they acquired at birth and have since duly elected to retain.”

        So he didn’t deny Congress the power to enact such a statute– he merely noted that they hadn’t done so.
        Federal courts have time and again deferred to Congress’s power to naturalize– or not to– when it comes to persons born outside the United States; Justice Blackmun, writing for the slim majority in Rogers v. Bellei said,

        “the Court has specifically recognized the power of Congress not to grant a United States citizen the right to transmit citizenship by descent.”

        None of the dissenting justices contested that point; Justice Brennan, joined by Justice Douglas, said

        “Concededly, petitioner was a citizen at birth, not by constitutional right, but only through operation of a federal statute.”

        But more directly to the point in regard to your hypothetical, I’d direct your attention to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Montana v. Kennedy, 366 U.S. 308 (1961). Mauro John Montana,

        “whose mother is a native-born United States citizen and whose father is a citizen of Italy (their marriage having been in the United States), was born in Italy in 1906 while his parents were temporarily residing there, and entered the United States with his mother later the same year. He has continuously resided in the United States since that time and has never been naturalized.”

        The circumstances surrounding Montana’s birth are described in more detail in the lower court opinion (Montana v. Rogers, 278 F.2d 68 (7th Cir. 1960):

        “The record reveals the following events. Maddelena Montana, mother of plaintiff, was born in Jersey City, New Jersey, in 1890. Her father was a naturalized American citizen. She lived in Jersey City until her marriage on August 26, 1905, to Guiseppe (Joe) Montana, father of plaintiff. Guiseppe Montana was born in Italy; prior to his marriage, he had resided in either Brooklyn, New York or Bayonne, New Jersey without acquiring citizenship status in the United States.
        On the 15th or 16th day of January, 1906, Maddelena and Guiseppe Montana left the United States en route to Italy, where they arrived on February 2, 1906. The purpose of their trip was to join Maddelena’s parents who were visiting relatives in Italy. At the time she departed from the United States, Maddelena Montana was about four months pregnant.
        Maddelena, the sole witness in the declaratory judgment action under review (plaintiff’s illness precluded his testifying; the government offered no evidence) testified as to these subsequent events. About a month and a half after arriving in Italy, Maddelena, wishing to return to the United States, accompanied her parents to a “little town” to obtain passports. Her parents secured their passports, but the official on duty was unable to find her name. He informed Maddelena that she must see the American Consul to get her passport. Two or three days later Maddelena and her mother traveled to the American Consulate in Naples. According to her testimony, Maddelena said, “I want to go back to the United States and [the Consul] just took one look at me and he says, `I am sorry, Mrs., you cannot go in that condition. You come back after you get your baby.'” After this visit to the American Consulate Maddelena went to Acerra, Italy where she resided with her mother and where the plaintiff was born on June 26, 1906.
        In late March or early April, 1906, Guiseppe Montana had returned to the United States. Maddelena stated that at this time they “were on the outs. We were not talking.”
        After the birth of plaintiff, Maddelena returned to the American Consul from whom she secured a passport. She stated she had “not much” conversation with the Consul, but “asked him about my baby’s passport, and he said, `You don’t need it. It is in your own passport.'”
        Maddelena, with plaintiff and his grandmother, then returned to the United States. The records of the Immigration Service produced at the trial reveal that plaintiff (then three months old) was admitted to this country as a citizen, accompanied by his citizen mother and alien grandmother.
        After arrival in this country, plaintiff lived for three months with Maddelena and her parents. Thereafter, until his marriage in 1927, he lived with both parents who had become reconciled. After his marriage, and continuing to date, plaintiff has resided with his own family in the Chicago, Illinois, area. At no time has he instituted naturalization proceedings.”

        So there we have someone who almost exactly fits your hypothetical. Now Montana was a character the United States wanted to get rid of, but the Court had to decide his citizenship on the law– and the law plainly failed him. The Court confirmed that he was an alien and subject to removal. Thirty-three years later, Congress finally provided a statute that would’ve made him a citizen. I wonder if he was still alive.

      • dunstvangeet

        The case you’re talking about is actually discussing a completely different statute, and does not fall under what I was talking about.

        What I was talking about was a statute that had a time limit, where the person, if he was born 3 months later, would have been a Citizen of the United States, but solely due to his mother’s age, was not a citizen of the United States. The statutes that he was born to would not have allowed citizenship born abroad no matter his mother’s age. There was no 5-year requirement after the age of 14 which the mother could not have met solely due to the age of the mother. The statutes at the time basically said that only men transmitted citizenship abroad, rather than women, and if the situation had been flipped (born to a citizen father who was 16 years old, rather than a citizen mother who was 16-years-old) that would have been okay. At no time did the age of the mother come into play.

        Like I said, it would be interesting to see how the court deals with it. You may be correct that the court would declare him not to be a citizen. I may be correct that the court may take a look at the intent of the law, and decide that there was no intent to deny citizenship to someone who was born to an 18-year-old, rather than a 19-year-old. But it’s an academic exercise anyways.

      • Dave B.

        You’re right that the statute is different, but the principle is the same: can Congress deny the right of a citizen to transmit citizenship to a child born abroad? The Court has always affirmed that Congress can do so; that there is no constitutional right to transmit citizenship; that no one born outside the United States can be or become a US citizen in the absence of a treaty or statute providing for it; and that the conditions set by a statute must be perfectly met.
        But how about US v. Flores-Villar, 536 F.3d 990 (2008)? From Judge Rymer’s opinion:

        “Flores-Villar was born in Tijuana, Mexico on October 7, 1974 to Ruben Trinidad Floresvillar-Sandez, his United States citizen biological father who was sixteen at the time, and Maria Mercedes Negrete, his non-United States citizen biological mother. Floresvillar-Sandez had been issued a Certificate of Citizenship on May 24, 1999 based on the fact that his mother—Flores Villar’s paternal grandmother—is a United States citizen by birth.
        His father and grandmother brought Flores-Villar to the United States for medical treatment when he was two months old. He grew up in San Diego with his grandmother and father. Floresvillar-Sandez is not listed on Flores-Villar’s birth certificate, but he acknowledged Flores-Villar as his son by filing an acknowledgment of paternity with the Civil Registry in Mexico on June 2, 1985.”

        After a criminal conviction, Flores-Villar was found to be an alien subject to removal, and was deported– six times.

        “Meanwhile, Flores-Villar filed an N-600 application seeking a Certificate of Citizenship, which was denied on the ground that it was physically impossible for his father, who was sixteen when Flores-Villar was born, to have been present in the United States for five years after his fourteenth birthday as required by § 1401(a)(7).”

        Flores-Villar claimed his rights were violated by both age and gender discrimination:

        “Flores-Villar’s position is that, because it is legally and physically impossible for United States citizen fathers under age nineteen to confer citizenship upon their foreign-born, illegitimate children even if they have resided in the United States for ten years, whereas an unmarried citizen mother need only show one year of residence, the statutory scheme treats men under nineteen differently from similarly situated men over nineteen.”

        The court affirmed the rational basis of the statute, denied the claims of age and gender discrimination, and “concluded that § 1401(a)(7) passes constitutional muster.” And the fact that Congress had subsequent to Flores-Villar’s birth relaxed the requirement, which could be construed to mitigate any “intent to deny citizenship” on the basis of age, was of no relevance.
        The Supreme Court upheld the circuit court’s ruling.
        So there you have someone who was born to a 16-year old, rather than a 19-year old. Would the constitutional issue have been any different if the father had been two years older?

  • Mary Ciulla

    Wasting our time and money – what the right-wing does best.

  • Wallace Torbert

    Look, just say..If you touch one hair of our President you will be deported to Heaven or Hell

  • Leaning Blue

    Can’t we deport Ted Cruz instead?

  • bmiller

    The stank of the Democrat writing the article to rebuff the remarks of the gentleman who filed the necessary document in order to get things moving that is more than I can say about the Congress for they have done nothing even when their constituency has begged them to act. For one I hope the papers filed show the nation it could be done and without the Congress or any other Representative we sent to act on out behalf in DC. We must take the country back. As for Deporting him I think we should hang him first and they can dump him in the Delaware of out at sea in the deepest trench there so no one could ever reclaim anything Obama.

    • Dave B.

      What “necessary document in order to get things moving” are you talking about? The only thing that’s going to get “moving” is Klayman’s crank letter, when it gets passed around the office for everybody to laugh at.

  • glogrrl

    To Hawaii?

  • Jeffrey Mullins

    This is a joke right?

  • knoxcat6

    If I were a judge in this case I would summarily find for the President and put Mr. Klayman in jail for wasting the court’s valuable time!

  • Laurissa Graves

    Right off the cliff…”When I read that all I really saw was someone
    saying, “I don’t like the fact that a black man is in charge.”…
    ——–
    Because everything to you is a race issue just like Sharpton, Jackson and
    everyone else on the Radical left.