Donofrio vs Wells: Obama citizenship case covered by the Chicago Tribune

Tomorrow the High Court conferences over Donofrio vs. Wells. According to reporting by James Janega of the Chicago Tribune, the case has little chance of succeeding.

Legal experts say the appeal has little chance of succeeding, despite appearing on the court’s schedule. Legal records show it is only the tip of an iceberg of nationwide efforts seeking to derail Obama’s election over accusations that he either wasn’t born a U.S. citizen or that he later renounced his citizenship in Indonesia.

Another article published yesterday in the Tribune sumarizes some of issues surrounding this and other cases.
This morning I received via email a fundraising appeal from the United States Justice Foundation.

UPDATE: Our efforts to compel Senator Barack Obama to produce a valid birth certificate in order to prove that he is constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States ARE TAKING OFF!
As you may already know, we recently filed suit in California to push the issue and, at this very moment, we’re helping to fund the suit in Mississippi. We are in communication with other states that have suits in process; and we’re putting plans into action to file suits in additional states as well!
But, because our efforts are taking off, that also means we need your help!
According to a recent headline in WorldNetDaily, Team Obama tried to dismiss efforts to demand that he prove his eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States as “GARBAGE”!
But they’re taking the matter a little bit more seriously NOW! With each passing day, Team Obama is finding it harder and harder to dismiss the question.

I really wonder what the end game is when the Supreme Court goes through several denied certiorari petitions. In part due to the media neglect surrounding Obama’s record and background during the election, I think the distrust of media has given rise to a willingness on the part of some people to give weight to the narratives questioning Obama’s citizenship. A glance through the almost 500 comments on an early Berg vs. Obama thread will reveal sincere people trying to sort through often contradictory information. In this environment, I think the entrance into the arena by the Tribune is a good thing. With lawsuits being filed in many states, the story does not seem to be going away.
For my part, it seems to me that the state of Hawaii is the final word on this matter. If the Land of Chaka says Obama was born there, I cannot see any U.S. Court taking any other perspective.
UPDATE: A related case, Wrotnowski vs. Sec of State Connecticut, also was denied certiorari today. (h/t: Rich)

14 thoughts on “Donofrio vs Wells: Obama citizenship case covered by the Chicago Tribune”

  1. The Williams article makes a terrible case. It replaces the Constitution with a book by a Swiss guy to make it’s case.

  2. The Sun Sentinel article states, “under U.S. law, persons born in the United States are natural born citizens”. This is a true statement if we are talking about the U.S. Code passed by congress, specifically 8 USC 1401. But there is no reason to believe that the term “natural born citizen”, as used in USC, was meant to redefine the term “natural born Citizen” as used in the U.S. Constitution as an eligibility requirement for president. Even if this had been congress’ intent, congress cannot change the meaning of the Constitution through legislation alone.
    The Williams article, cited earlier, makes a convincing case that “natural born Citizen” has always meant “born on U.S. soil to parents, both of whom were U.S. citizens at the time of birth”.
    In most states, the Secretary of State is responsible for checking the eligibility of each candidate. Almost all of them have admitted that they never bothered to do any checking of any kind into any candidate’s eligibility. Not only did they not bother to consider the implications of Obama’s dual citizenship at birth, they never bothered to ask for his original long-form “vault” birth certificate.
    Thus the lawsuit asks the Supreme Court (a) to order each Secretary of State to do his/her job, specifically, to properly investigate and certify each candidate’s eligibility before permitting the electors of that state to vote for that candidate in the Electoral College; and (b) to give guidance as to what the “natural born Citizen” presidential eligibility requirement is.

  3. Thanks Ann.
    Tonight’s karaoke was online. New (for me at least) on MySpace. I practiced a few but didn’t add anything to my saved performances. Today’s high temp was 17 degrees here…no urge to go out for the evening.
    The birth certificate doesn’t play into the Donofrio hearing. Berg was questioning his actual place of birth; Donofrio is questioning the British citizenship conferred on Obama by way of his father’s Kenyan citizenship. The Berg thread tended to mix the two issues.

  4. maybe that’s a sign that I should focus on karaoke tonight instead of blogging.
    Know this is off topic – just wanted to wish you a good time tonight.
    On topic – I agree with your thoughts about FredVN. Not sure where this whole thing will go but I am perplexed as to why it is not being concluded by providing the proper documentation, ie – hospital records that would indicate where he was born, doctor’s notes, etc., that would satisfy his eligibility for those he will be working for and paying his salary. The appearance of evading is as bad as the actual act of evading. He is always going to have to face his opponents in one way or another but in this particular instance all he has to do is provide the right documentation and it will be over with. The longer it goes, the worse it looks.

  5. LOL….
    ….’notify me of follow-up comments button’.
    I don’t know what mystery key I hit that sent the first incomplete sentence. Hmmm…maybe that’s a sign that I should focus on karaoke tonight instead of blogging.

  6. Good call, Robare! There is a big distinction between Berg’s case and Donofrio’s altough many of the Obama opponents on the Berg thread didn’t seem to be aware of the difference. As long as it was ‘anti-Obama’, they were as happy as pigs in the wallow…with a whole lot of thrashing to splash the mud around.
    I’ve appreciated your contributions to the discussions. Thanks for being a level-headed contributor!

  7. If you go the the Berg thread you will find some additional new related links you may find interesting.

  8. Robare “Donofrio asserts The Founders meant that a person must be born on U.S. soil AND that both of his/her parents are U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.”
    We know that’s false. Natural born “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution” is the law. The Founders weren’t even that strict on natural born during their time.

  9. Grants of certiorari for Dec. 5
    al-Marri v. Pucciarelli (08-368)
    Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. (08-441)
    Sorry kooks. At least you got the liberal elite media to publicize your baseless cases.

  10. Stating the obvious, there is one simple fix for this and Obama won’t do it… you gotta at least wonder

  11. This is NOT related to whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii. The Donofrio case with the Supreme Court admits Obama probably was born in Hawaii.
    Rather, his case addresses the Constitution’s meaning of “natural born citizen.” Donofrio asserts The Founders meant that a person must be born on U.S. soil AND that both of his/her parents are U.S. citizens at the time of his birth. Obama’s Dad was a British citizen given “Kenya” was one of its colonies then. Hence Obama was not a “natural born citizen” and cannot become President. Well, if that is, the Supreme Court agrees with Donofrio’s assertion. Lastly, FYI, Donofrio’s case is the only one that makes this argument.

Comments are closed.