Obama eligibility case lives!
Supreme Court's own precedent cited in new demand for resolution.
Published: 08/15/2014 at 9:52 PM

http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/obama-eligibility-case-lives/

The question of Barack Obama’s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office under the Constitution’s “natural born”citizen requirement is once again being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has refused to hear a number of previous cases. Judges have ruled Obama’s eligibility is a political question that is not for the courts to decide. They have argued the plaintiffs didn’t have “standing,” the
requirement that they have sustained or will sustain direct injury or harm that can be redressed by a court.

Now, however, a plaintiff has surfaced who claims he has suffered a specific and individual injury, the $90 he is seeking to have returned by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The president’s eligibility is beingquestioned in a friend-of-the-court brief submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court by the constitutional experts at William J. Olson, P.C. and the United States Justice Foundation.

They are asking the high court to take up the case of Christopher John Rudy, a registered patent attorney who paid to the Patent and Trademark Office “fee increases” totaling $90 under the America Invents Act, “purportedly enacted into law in September 2011 by Congress and the president.” Rudy sued for a refund “on the ground that the AIA was invalid, having been signed into law by Barack Obama, a person who, was not a ‘natural born citizen,’ and thus, was
ineligible to hold the office of president of the United States.”

The courts rejected his claim, insisting they had no authority to look into Obama’s eligibility. The law firms’ brief explained Rudy’s argument. “Until now, the question of President Obama’s qualifications as a ‘natural born citizen’ has been dodged by the judiciary because those challenging his eligibility had not suffered any personal injury compensable by a court – and thus lacked ‘legal’ standing. There is no such barrier in this case because the patent
attorney suffered an out-of-pocket loss of $90 because of the new law signed by President Obama.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/18/Wednesday-Marks-the-Return-of-the-Tea-Party?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+June+18%2C+2013&utm_campaign=20130618_m116382202_Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+June+18%2C+2013&utm_term=More

Wednesday Marks the Return of the Tea Party.
by Mike Flynn 18 Jun 2013

On Wednesday, at two rallies bracketing the Capitol, Tea Party and conservative activists will again take center-stage on two issues dominating the national political dialogue. Reps. Steve King, Louie Gohmert and other members of the Tea Party Caucus will host a nearly day-long dialogue and discussion on immigration reform. On the other side of the Capitol, Tea Party grass roots organizations will hold a rally to "Audit the IRS," in response to the agency's efforts to intimidate conservative organizations.

The immigration event hosted by Rep. King begins at 9am on the East side of the Capitol. The morning event will run until Noon and feature several members of Congress and national conservative leaders. Glenn Beck, who was an early supporter of the Tea Party movement will speak at the event. At Noon, on the West side of the Capitol, Tea Party Patriots are hosting a rally to "Audit the IRS." Sens. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and many member of Congress are scheduled to speak. Glenn Beck and other conservative leaders will also speak.

The event, attended by activists from around the country will draw new attention to the IRS scandal, where the agency targeted groups and individuals based on their political activity. The IRS scandal is simply the most egregious example of an Obama Administration singling out conservative organizations and individuals for differential treatment. The EPA, Labor Department and other federal agencies have exhibited similar behavior.

The Tea Party event runs until 2pm, at which time King's Immigration event reconvenes for more discussion on  immigration reform. King has invited supporters of the Senate's Amnesty bill to debate the merits of that approach. The event, running until 5pm, will provide more sustained debate on the issue of immigration than will probably occur within the Halls of Congress.

The two rallies are bigger than the sum of their parts, however. They mark the return of Tea Party activists to the national political stage. While dominating the 2010 mid-term elections, the Tea Party was marginalized by the Romney campaign and the national GOP in 2012 and were less of a factor in the elections. The Obama scandals and the polarizing issue of amnesty have forced them back into the political arena.

The looming implementation of ObamaCare and another round of talks to hike the debt ceiling will provoke many activists again take up the banner of limited government and constitutional conservatism. The growing revelations about government surveillance will likely bring newer voices to the movement. When the Tea Party started in 2009, the idea of government growing out of control was a theory. Today, it is a fact. Wednesday marks the beginning of the 2014 mid-term elections.

American Student Punished for Refusing to Recite Mexican Pledge

Feb 27, 2013

By Todd Starnes

A Texas high school student has filed a federal lawsuit against her school and her teachers after she was punished for refusing to salute and recite the Mexican pledge of allegiance.

The Thomas More Law Center filed the suit on behalf of Brenda Brinsdon alleging the McAllen Independent School District violated the 15-year-old girl’s constitutional rights when she was forced to recite the Mexican pledge and sing the Mexican national anthem.

Click here to read the lawsuit.

Brinsdon, who is the daughter of a Mexican immigrant and an American father, refused. She believed it was un-American to pledge a loyalty oath to another country.

Ironically, the school district has a policy that prohibits a school from compelling students to recite the American Pledge of Allegiance.

The district also has a written policy that excuses students from reciting text from the Declaration of Independence if the student “as determined by the district, has a conscientious objection to the recitation.”

“There is a sad trend in public schools across our nation to undermine American patriotism,” said Richard Thompson president of the Thomas More Law Center. “But it’s encouraging to see students like Brenda stand up for America despite pressure from school officials.”

The TMLC told Fox News the district ignored its own rules when Brinsdon refused to recite the pledge of a foreign country.

What’s most troubling is the different treatment for someone wanting to opt out of reciting the American Pledge of Allegiance compared to someone as a matter of conscience wants to opt out of reciting the Mexican pledge,” spokesman Erin Mersino told Fox News.

A spokesman for the McAllen Independent School District told Fox News they had not seen a copy of the lawsuit.

The recitation of the Mexican pledge and the singing of the Mexican national anthem was part of a 2011 Spanish class assignment at Achieve Early College High School.  The teacher, Reyna Santos, required all her students to participate in the lesson.

When Brinsdon refused to back down – she was punished, the lawsuit alleges. She was given an alternative assignment on the Independence of Mexico. The teacher gave her a failing grade – and then required the student to sit in class over a period of several days to listen to other students recite the Mexican pledge.

The lawsuit states Brinsdon offered to recite the American pledge in Spanish but the teacher refused her request.

“It’s astonishing that this Texas school would deny Brenda her right of conscience and free speech not to pledge allegiance to a foreign country,” said Thompson. “Too many Americans – including those of Mexican descent – have suffered and died protecting our nation.”

And while she is fluent in Spanish and English and is proud of her Mexican heritage, Brinsdon is a “true-blooded American,” Mersino added.

Mersino said it was especially troubling to watch video of students in the class standing up, extending their arms straight out, palms down and reciting the pledge of a foreign country.

“It’s disturbing – it truly was troubling,” she said.

RUBIO MUST DISQUALIFY HIMSELF FROM HIGH OFFICE.
By J.B. Williams

http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams234.htm
January 20, 2013

If so-called “constitutionalists” were better acquainted with the Constitution (Charters of Freedom), they
would not be supporting Marco Rubio for an office he is not eligible to hold and they would have already removed Barack Hussein Obama from the office he currently holds fraudulently. Marco Rubio is in the unique position to solve our nation’s greatest problem, to remove a foreign agent currently assaulting America from within the Oval Office and set the nation back on a constitutional course towards freedom and liberty. Rubio has an opportunity to be a true American hero. Will he be?

Because Rubio was dragged into the political spotlight by Tea Party folks in desperate search of new conservative leadership, and because he shares in common with Obama, constitutional ineligibility for the
offices of president and vice president under Article II requirements, he is uniquely positioned to bring down the most anti-American regime to ever hold political power in the United States.

Unlike “birthers” who are trying to disqualify Obama on the basis of his unconfirmed place of birth (native born
status), which is still in question due to Obama’s fraudulent efforts to hide his real past and true identity, using nondisclosure and forged documents to remain a total mystery, -- true “constitutionalists” who have studied the matter completely and allowed the facts to emerge without partisan purpose, know the whole truth.

1) The foundations for America are stated in the preamble to the Declaration of Independence. Pay particular attention to the parts highlighted.

IN
CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Contrary to contemporary teachings by revisionists, the legal precepts for everything our Founders created is NOT "British common law" which we separated from via the Declaration and the American Revolution. It is "The laws of Nature and of Nature's God," as stated in the preamble to our nation’s founding document, The Declaration. Just as freedom and liberty are “natural rights” inalienable by men, so is the right of Natural Born Citizenship.

2) Revisionists claim that Natural Born Citizen is not defined in the Constitution. However, the US Constitution does not have a definitions section; therefore, it provides no definition for any of the words or terms used in that document. Of course, as the Charters of Freedom were written in plain simple English so that any citizen could read and comprehend their rights and the limited functions of the government bodies they were to form, no definitions were needed. Everyone alive at the time knew the true meaning of every word and every term, including Natural Born Citizen. But 236 years later, dumbed down by revisionist propaganda, Americans may have to do a little homework to rediscover basic truths.

3) During that period in history, the framing of the Charters of Freedom, our Founders left a perfect record of their concerns and intents in the Federalist Papers. Anyone not able to comprehend the simple English carefully crafted in the Charters of Freedom can study the thoughts behind those words in the Federalist
Papers. If you do not know the Federalists Papers, you do not know the Constitution.

4) There is no guess-work or ambiguity… We know from reading the correspondences of our Founders, that they borrowed the concepts for the Charters of Freedom (Natural Law - Laws of Nature - God's Law - inalienable Law of Nations) -- from the internationally recognized authority on the subject at the time, Vattel, recorded in French and later translated to English, The Law of Nations, written on the inalienable laws of nature respected by all nations and inescapable by man. [Most of the Founding Fathers were as fluent in French as they were
English.] Included, was the term Natural Born Citizen, a citizen by the laws of nature, not the laws of man, in fact, inalienable by the laws of man.

In Vattel's Law of Nations, he defines the term Natural Born Citizen, not in one sentence, but in several sections, 211 – 233 of Book One. One truly seeking the truth about our Charters of Freedom and Natural Born Citizenship should read the entire Law of Nations, it is a brilliant work on Natural Law and it is in fact the cornerstone of the Charters of Freedom created by our Founders.

But in short, Vattel defines Natural Born Citizen as follow;

NOTE: "Birthers" mistakenly (or intentionally) cherry-pick a single sentence from several sections on the subject, discarding all else, including the actual definition. - "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." - This is NOT the definition of Natural Born Citizen. It is only a general statement affirming that natives are born in country and naturals are born of citizen parents.

Vattel goes on to define Natural Born Citizen and the reasoning behind it...

* "As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."

** "The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent."

*** "I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."

This is why Barack Hussein Obama is a total fraud, constitutionally ineligible for office. Unfortunately, so is Marco Rubio, among others.

If Marco Rubio is the great “American Son” he portrays himself to be, the great young constitutionally conservative leader that so many Tea Party folks hope that he is, he must take a stand for the U.S. Constitution
and America right now, as only he can do. Because many of his loyal followers have such high hopes for his political future, Marco Rubio can secure that future by taking the stand that only he is positioned to take right
now.

Unless and until so-called "constitutionalists" get Article II right, they can forget every right they think they have....because if Article II does not exist in force or affect, neither does any other part of those founding
documents that protect the Natural Rights of all American citizens.

I call upon Marco Rubio to stand and become the great leader he wants to be, the leader so many believe him to be. I call upon Marco Rubio to stand and tell ALL Americans that he is ineligible for the offices of president and vice president, as the natural born son of a Father who was a citizen of Cuba (not the United States) at the time of his birth.

Man-made statutes generously gave Rubio and many others like him, American citizenship, via the 14th Amendment, our immigration and naturalization amendment governing the citizenship rights of immigrants through naturalization, or native born rights.

Rubio is a citizen of the United States by way of man-made laws, not Natural Law. Likewise, no matter whether Obama was born in Hawaii or Kenya, his natural birth Father was at no time in his life a citizen of the United States. Therefore, Obama’s Father could not confer to Barack Hussein Obama II that which he did not possess, U.S. Citizenship.

Marco Rubio can solve this entire issue and much more. He can stop Obama’s Marxist march off the cliff and save the country he claims to care about deeply, as well as freedom and liberty in America. He can do so by standing up before the nation and the world, proclaiming himself ineligible for high office and demanding that Barack Hussein Obama be immediately removed from office and charged with high treason for the most horrific fraud ever perpetrated on the American public and the world.

If Rubio refuses to do so, he is NOT what so many had hoped. He will be nothing more than just another political fraud seeking personal gain at the expense of the U.S. Charters of Freedom and the future of freedom and liberty, not just here, but throughout the free world.

If Article II no longer matters, nothing in the Charters of Freedom matters anymore. I call upon Marco Rubio to take a stand and end this nightmare. Stand and tell the people the truth Mr. Rubio, or become just another disappointment to the people, pandering to the captive Tea Party audience but no less complicit in the massive
fraud.

DO IT NOW… Before a second fraudulent inauguration!

I have sent this call for action directly to Marco Rubio and I call upon you to do the same.

JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a
twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner. He is
co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization preparing to take on American's greatest legal battles. Williams receives mail at: jb.uspu@gmail.com