Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
2011-12-Xx Risenhoover Motion to Intervene

2011-12-Xx Risenhoover Motion to Intervene

Ratings: (0)|Views: 18 |Likes:
Published by Jack Ryan

More info:

Published by: Jack Ryan on Jan 28, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/28/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Welden et alv.ObamaOFFICE
OF
STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE
OF
GEORGIADocket Number: OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-: 1215137-60-MALIHIMotion to intervene for the US as Relator,
to
oppose the Van Irion segregation requestGeorgia lost the Civil
War,
it will be recalled, and was required
to
adopt the fifteenthamendment, which plausibly also amended the qualifications for holding thePresidency which serves as the Commander in
Chief
for the United States whichoccupy the Cherokee Nation lands known pejoratively as Georgia (see GeorgiaSecretary
of
State History
of
Passports issued
by
Georgia for travel by white persons
of
the US to the Cherokee Nation, Worcester v Georgia, Elk v Wilkins (authority inMinor v Happensett).In Sai v Obama (now Sai v Clinton), the US Attorney in their Reply,have invoked the DC Quo Warranto provisions, asserting to the DC Circuitthat the President is entitled by quo warranto
to
his office because
of
birth in Hawaii,viz US v Wong Kim Ark, andsee the recent Ninth Circuit opinion, stating," In Taitz
v.
Obama,707
F.
Supp. 2d
1,
2-4 (D.D.C. 2010), the District Court for the District
of
Columbia stated that
"a
quowarranto action against a public official may bebrought only by the Attorney General
or
the U.S. Attorney." Id. at 3 (citing Andrade
v.
Lauer, 729 F.2d 1475, 1498 (D.C. Cir.1984))." TheUS Attorney for the District
of
Columbia, Ronald Machen Jr., retractedhis Federalist Society secret minions collusion
to
argue that the President was only acitizen because
of
the Fourteenth Amendment by birth "Within the United States" inthe "State
of
Hawaii", and in their further opposition reply in
Dr.
SAl v OBAMA andClinton before the US Court
of
Appeals for the DC Circuit, the US no longer assertsthe facetious argument that the President is a citizen derivative to birth in a purportedState
of
"Hawaii". See http://hawaiiankingdom.org/pdf/MSA.pdflndeed,
President
Barack Obama's
status
as
a
"natural
born
citizen" derives from
his birth
in theState
of
Hawaii.
See
U.S.
Const.
Art. II,
§
1,
cl.
4
("NoPersonexcept
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").Retracted
by
omissionary implication,
http://hawaiiankingdom.org/pdf/Feds Reply Appeal.pdf.Van Irion makes the clearly erroneous argument that the Constitutional requirement
of
being a "natural born citizen" (a requirement which is not self-executing, and hasnever
been
parsed through any legislation
by
the Congress who are the sole
judge
of
the results
of
the Electoral College presented to them for adjudication as comporting
with
the Constitution in their legislature's judicial capacity).Relator agrees that Van Irion has standing to argue as a citizen
of
Georgia occupyingthe Cherokee Nation, under Bond v US (524 US
__
2011).The question
is
thus ripe for review in this Court, and the Court should declare:
1.
children
of
US mothers are the natural semantic sense
of
the phrase "natural borncitizen", because only US mothers give birth, US fathers do not give birth (at least notat present, but
if
they did, they too would
be
mothers then and their children alsonatural born).
2.
Minor
v Happensett only held that women as US citizens did not necessarily haveto enjoy an equal right to vote as a state elector, something one US Attorney General
had not
quite agreed with (see Opinion
of
AG Bates, AG Opinion on SeminoleFreedmen, AG Opinion on authority
of
the President to repatriate interdicted slaves,http:// digicoll.library. wisc. edulcgi -binIFRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=
FR
US .FRUS 187374v02&entity=FRUS.FRUS187374v02.p0684&ql=attorney%20general&q2=opinion&q3=citizen,http://digicoll.library.wisc.edulcgi-binlFRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS187374v02.p0589&id=FRUS.FRUSI87374v02&isize=M&ql=attorney%20general&q2=opinion&q3=citizen)Cchildren
of
US
citizen mothers, are natural born citizens (only women give birth, naturalborn citizen can ONLY mean birth
to
a
US
citizen mother, US citizen fathers' childrenmust be by statute naturalized), matemallineage citizens, which
is
why Congress only needed to exercise the uniform naturalization authority
to
declare thatchildren born abroad
of
US
citizen fathers heritage (but to foreign citizen mothers) werealsocitizens
of
the
US:
see August 20, 1873 AG Opinionhttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edulcgi-biniFRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUSI87374v02.p0586&id=FRUS.FRUS187374v02&isize=M&gl=attorneY%20general&q2=0
 
pinion&q3=citizenQuestion VII. Are the children born abroad
of
a person who has been a citizen
of
theUnited States, but who "has become a subject or citizen
of
anotherpower, or whohas expatriated himself, citizens
of
the United States, and entitled toits protection?Answer. Section 1
of
the act
of
February 10, 1855, (10
U.
S.
Stat.,
p.
604,) provides that
11
persons heretofore born, or hereafter to be born,out
of
the limits and jurisdiction
of
the United States, whose fatherswere, or shall be at the time
of
their birth, citizens
of
the United States,shall be deemed and considered, and are hereby declared to be, citizens
of
the United States: Provided, however, that the rights
of
citizenshipshall not descend to persons whose fathers never resided in the UnitedStates5;" from which,
as
well
as
from other considerations, it is evidentthat children born abroad
of
persons once citizens
of
the United States,but who have become citizens or subjects
of
a foreign power, are notcitizens
of
the United States,
or,
as such, entitled
to
their protection.http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-biniFRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FR
US
187374v02.p0573&id=FRUS.FRUSI87374v02&isize=M&g I =attorney%20genera1&q2=opinion&q3=citizen
AG
Bates Opinion in re
Minor
v Happensett principles
of
civil rights to vote
http://
digico ll.library. wisc. edu/cgi -binIFRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=
FR
US.FRUS 18737 4v02&entity=FRUS.FRUS 1873 74v02.p073 8&q1 =attorney%20general&q2=opinion&g3=bates
United States Department
of
State
I Executive documents printed
by
order
of
the House
of
Representatives.
1873-74
(1873-1874)
Papers
relating
to
expatriation, naturalization,
and
change
ofallegiance,
pp.
[1185]-1438
m
DF
(117.2
MB)

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->