The Donofrio Case: ‘Natural Born Citizen’ (not about Obama’s birth certificate)
December 5, 2008 by Arlen Williams
Filed under News and Opinion
The Donofrio Case: “Natural Born Citizen” (not about Obama’s birth certificate)
Today, before the United States Supreme Court, lies Leo Donofrio v. Nina Mitchell Wells, New Jersey Secretary of State. This suit was received by Justice Thomas and by the determination of the entire court, it is scheduled for conference, Friday December 5. This conference is held to decide what, if any, further steps should be taken. Only two of these steps would be to either intervene in the process of selecting the president, or to hear oral arguments. Essence of the case
By this case Barack Obama, John McCain, and Roger Calero (of the Socialist Workers Party, on the New Jersey ballot) do not qualify as “natural born Citizens” under Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, which states the following:
Standing
Other cases against Obama’s candidacy have been rejected by various courts, due to a private citizen’s apparent lack of standing to sue a candidate. However, this case is an action against the Secretary of State of New Jersey and as such, has precedent, as Donofrio relates. He originally sought to motivate the Secretary to qualify or disqualify these three candidates on the New Jersey ballot. Donofrio also cites 2000’s famous Florida case, Bush v. Gore, as precedent for a state case regarding a presidential election to be brought to the Supreme Court for emergency action.
Merit: reasoning behind Donofrio v. Wells
To interpret the U.S. Constitution with intellectual honesty, one must maintain the integrity of the meaning of the Constitution. That means interpreting the letter of the law: its words and phrases, based upon the immediate context of the Constitution itself, any explanations of the framers, traditional meaning inherited by the framers, and the generally accepted, legal meanings of words and phrases in use at the time of its drafting. Further, attention is to be paid to the spirit of the law, by understanding the purposes of the framers and the results they sought or sought to avoid, as they drafted each element of the Constitution.
In view of these considerations, being a “natural born Citizen,” here requires meeting both of these two criteria: 1. citizenship must be passed on by the constitutionally pertinent principle of natural law, which assumes that citizenship is inherited from one’s father’s citizenship and, 2. citizenship must be granted by means of being born in the actual territory of the United States. Accordingly, to maintain the original intention of the Constitution’s framers, a U.S. President is to be free of competing allegiances with other nations, from birth onward. To cite Donofrio’s own words from his blog:
The Framers wanted to make themselves eligible to be President, but they didn’t want future generations to be Governed by a Commander In Chief who had split loyalty to another Country. The Framers were comfortable making an exception for themselves. They did, after all, create the Constitution. But they were not comfortable with the possibility of future generations of Presidents being born under the jurisdiction of Foreign Powers, especially Great Britain and its monarchy, who the Framers and Colonists fought so hard in the American Revolution to be free of.
According to this case, Barack H. Obama II is not qualified, because his father, Barack H. Obama I, was a citizen of the United Kingdom as a Kenyan. Kenya was a British colony at the time of Obama II’s birth in 1961. This citizenship was conferred to Obama II by U.K. law. Further to this case is the apparent fact that Obama II became a citizen of Indonesia, when he lived there as a child with his mother and adoptive father, Lolo Soetoro. This would mean Obama’s U.S. Citizenship status was revoked, since Indonesia had no dual-citizenship provision with the U.S.A.
According to this case, John McCain is not qualified, because he was born on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone, which was a protectorate of the United States and has never been a territory of the United States, even though his parents were U.S. Citizens.
According to this case, Roger Calero is not qualified, because he was born a citizen of Nicaragua, to foreign parents, on foreign soil. The mere fact that Roger Calero was on the ballot in five states indicates to the Supreme Court and the nation, that the process of qualifying a presidential candidate is broken and intervention is necessary.
Merit: context, corroboration, and case law
Corroborative to this case, the Constitution’s Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10 states that a power of Congress is to “define and punish… offenses against the law of nations.” The Law of Nations has been international law, which as documented by Emmerich de Vatel (1758) states, in Chapter XIX, paragraph 212, “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. 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 rig
hts.”Vatel follows with paragraph 215, in which he asserts, “It is asked whether the children born of citizens in a foreign country are citizens? The laws have decided this question in several countries, and their regulations must be followed.(59) By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights (§ 212); the place of birth produces no change in this particular, and cannot, of itself, furnish any reason for taking from a child what nature has given him; I say ‘of itself,’ for, civil or political laws may, for particular reasons, ordain otherwise.”
The chief framer of the related 14th Amendment of the Constitution, John A. Bingham corroborated this dual criteria stating, “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” An extensive analysis citing this is “Defining Natural-Born Citizen,” by P.A. Madison, The Federalist Blog.
Since then, the case of Perkins v. ELG, U.S. 325 (1939) provides precedent for requiring these two criteria, for one to be called a “native born citizen” (see, “The Law — Perkins v. ELG,” blog, The Betrayal).
St. George Tucker, Justice of the Supreme Court of Virgina, wrote a version of the authoritative Blackstone’s Commentaries: With Notes of Reference to the Constitution… which became a recognized resource for determining the framers’ original intent. In his Volume 1 — Appendix; Note D, he explained that the Article 2 “natural born Citizen” requirement was purposed to avoid competing allegiances:
That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, whereever it is capable of being exerted, is to he dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. It was by means of foreign connections that the stadtholder of Holland, whose powers at first were probably not equal to those of a president of the United States, became a sovereign hereditary prince before the late revolution in that country. Nor is it with levity that I remark, that the very title of our first magistrate, in some measure exempts us from the danger of those calamities by which European nations are almost perpetually visited. The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora’s Box.
Certainly, this applied to sons of subjects of the United Kingdom (and the fact that one such subject would travel abroad to declare himself a “Citizen of the World” before hundreds of thousands might also have provided relevant warning).
Intended result of this case
The Donofrio suit calls for a stay of the Dec. 15 Electoral College vote, until a constitutionally acceptable means is attained, of presenting the Electors a set of qualified candidates.
During or after their Dec. 5 conference, the Supreme Court could decide upon a number of directions. Their next step may be revealed this very day, or on Monday, Dec. 8, or at some other time. A book could be written of the many potential outcomes — and historians will write libraries about one set of results, in their hindsight.
“Post Script” in HTML
Leo Donofrio reports that numerous obstacles have been intentionally placed in the way of his petitioning the courts, in both New Jersey and at the Supreme Court. He also names public officials who have at times attempted to mislead him and by their treatment of his case, have obstructed his path to the Supreme Court. That is another story and not an undramatic one.
Donofrio has had three blogs — and Internet harassment, as follows:
- http://blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen — used through November 21, until its blog service was hit by a denial of service attack, bringing it down (servers have been repaired)
- http://thenaturalborncitizen.blogspot.com — used through November 27, until it became clear that Google has not been at all swift to remove a “flag page,” inappropriately citing that blog for “possible Blogger Terms of Service violations”
- http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com — hopefully, unmolested as of your reading
This report may be updated, here and/or at investigatingobama.blogspot.com, as progress is made. For information about the operations of the Supreme Court in such matters, see “A Reporter’s Guide to Applications Pending Before the Supreme Court of the United States.”
h/t: numerous bloggers and forum posters including FReepers, MamaTexan and joygrace


![[del.icio.us]](http://forthardknox.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Facebook]](http://forthardknox.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Twitter]](http://forthardknox.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
![[Email]](http://forthardknox.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)







Love your case law references! I wonder if SCOTUS reads blogs with so many pertinent facts floating about. Thanks for the post.
Seems the Supreme Court is waiting to hear from me before issuing a decision on Donofrio, so here goes: While the Court is more than loathe to enter this dispute, currently it has no choice (thanks to the audacious one — and I don’t mean Leo, I mean Barack) and the ONLY WAY to bring closure, knowing CLOSURE IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL before any Presidential inauguration, is to back the original intent of the Constitution, meaning, Obama is NOT an Article II “natural born citizen” (albeit Obama may or may not be a “citizen”, a question heated by the steadfast refusal of the DNC or any of the Secretaries of State to require his birth certificate, which the Court will now not have to confront).
Perhaps the Supremes are waiting for a second on that, Ted…if so, I second that!
The biggest flaw in Leo Donofrio’s analysis is that the Framers did not say that they were not natural born Citizens because they were “subject to British jurisdiction at the time of (their) birth.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/263171
Court won’t review Obama’s eligibility to serve
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-obama-birth-certificate1dec08,0,7258812.story
to : tmjones, tmjones@tribune.com
Think about it, this will not go away. If he is hiding something on his birth certificate, you are HURTING AMERICA by defending Obama. If you love the USA and or Obama, you should rethink your next article on the subject. READ Donofrio, and Viera…. Obama is playing a very high risk game by refusing to release his birth certificate. THINK ABOUT IT…
When he becomes president after he makes his first law, anything, HE WILL BE SUED. Then the plainitiffs will demand proof he is eligible to be President of the USA…
It will not go away. That is the real news story here. And your bias blinds you so you have missed the real point.
If Donofrio is a nut, he is an educated one. His arguements make sense. Whether the supreme court deals with it now or later… It will be dealt with. A US President who has not made full open disclosure of school, health and birth records is truly dangerous.
You are not helping anyone by pretending this is a marginal fringe issue. Neither are Obama’s other crimes, seemingly ignored like REZKO buying him land, and his forged Selective Service Card. The people have spoken, but what if they were mislead? I know “BUSH” is a criminal, and this is retrobution for that. In the end, Biden will be our next pres. #44 or #45, depending on if Obama is flushed out now or later. But if it is later, think of the damages that could have been avoided by responsible reporting from the press. He hired 3 law firms to bury Berg v. Obama? In the past if a Presidential candidate did that. I can only imagine the uproar, but the press has gone dull, one sided and unfair. Perhaps you should think about a more robust analysis of the implications of a president with only a receipt of a birth certificate.
This whole thing has just gotten me wound up…
thanks,
I find it odd that Donofrio insists on interpreting the Constitution so strictly on what it says (where natural born in any context means nature at birth or quality at birth) and then turns around for his main point to rely on a Swiss philosopher (in translation, no less).
Since the fourteenth amendment most everybody understood that people born in the United States are citizens. And those doubters should have been assuaged by United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). which took its cue from British Common Law rather than Swiss philosophy.
And today the Supreme Court announced that Donofrio’s best pal lawsuit, Cort Wrotnowski v. SySusan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Secretary of State, is also denied. So as to Donofrio’s novel views on “natural-born citizen” as we say around here: That dog won’t hunt.
Donofrio’s scrambling now that is has been disclosed that President Chester A. Arthur was born in the United States to an American mother and an Irish father. He’s seeking to assassinate the character of kindly old Arthur, making him a usurper who tried to cover up his ancestry. Of course his father’s Irish emigration was in the New York Times, so it was hardly hidden.
Type “obama birth certificate” into Google: you get 2.5 million hits. Given what happened with Obama Birth Certificate Take 1, it makes perfect sense for him not to try Obama Birth Certificate Take 2. It would just be more of the same.
Well, Kevin, Donofrio may have lost his case, but the central question behind all of the lawsuits – where do Obama’s loyalties lie? – has yet to be answered. We shall see what we shall see.
Below are two official emails that dispute the public version of Obama’s Birth and his mother’s marriage to BHO Sr.
From: pubrec@u.washington.edu [mailto:pubrec@u.washington.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008
Subject: Re: Stanley “Ann” Dunham 1960 to 1970 class registration
Ms. Stanley Ann Dunham (BHO II’s mom) was enrolled at the University of Washington for:
Autumn 1961
Winter 1962
Spring 1962
The records responsive to your request from the University of Washington are above as provided by the Public Disclosure Laws of Washington State. This concludes the University’s response to your Public Records request. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions or concerns.
Madolyne Lawson
Office of Public Records
206-543-9180
From: Stuart Lau [mailto:stuartl@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008
Subject: Re: Inquiry
The University of Hawaii at Manoa is only able to provide the following information for Stanley Ann Dunham:
Dates of attendance:
Fall 1960 (First day of instruction 9/26/1960)
Spring 1963 – Summer 1966
Fall 1972 – Fall 1974
Summer 1976
Spring 1978
Fall 1984 – Summer 1992
Degrees awarded:
BA – Mathematics, Summer 1967 (August 6, 1967)
MA – Anthropology, Fall 1983 (December 18, 1983)
PhD – Anthropology, Summer 1992 (August 9, 1992)
Sincerely, Stuart Lau
****************************************
Stuart Lau
University Registrar
Office of Admissions and Records
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Ph: (808) 956-8010
****************************************
Commentary on University Emails…or Stop, Drop and Enroll:
For the BHO II Hawaiian Aug 4 1961 COLB to be accurate the following improbable events needed to occur:
1 month after starting classes, Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack’s mom, at age 17, got pregnant by the only black African man on the entire chain of Hawaiian islands.
2 months after getting pregnant, she drops out of college.
3 months after getting pregnant, she marries BHO Sr.
10 months after her first day at the U of HI, she delivers BHO II and immediately leaves her parents, her new husband, and her home, to fly alone with a newborn 2800 miles to Seattle to start college at the U of W.
Stanley Ann Dunham does not return to Hawaii until AFTER BHO Sr left the islands for Harvard.
This is an implausible series of events made even more nefarious because Obama II in his 2 bio books never mentions his mom left Hawaii when she was supposedly married to BHO Sr, nor does he mention she was in Washington State during this time.