Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
-
Upload
pamela-barnett -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
1/16
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA
MICHAEL C. VOELTZ, ))
Plaintiff, )
)vs. )
) Case No.: 2012CA00467
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, et. al. ))
)
Defendants. )
)
____________________________________________ )
PLAINTIFF'S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM ON THE DEFINITION OF
"NATURAL BORN CITIZEN"
Plaintiff has pled that Defendant Obama fails to meet the eligibility requirements for the
Presidency of the United States. This brief sets forth the rightful definition of "natural born
citizen," a requirement mandated by the Constitution, for eligibility to run for and hold the Office
of the President of the United States ("Office of the President" or "POTUS" or "President").
INTRODUCTION
In founding this country, the framers took great care in drafting and setting forth a new
form of government. The POTUS was established to become the leader of the nation. The
framers knew that this office, and the person elected to hold it, would command great power.
This elected President would be the Commander in Chief of the United States armed forces, and
would negotiate treaties on behalf of all the states within the United States. In order to prevent
even a slight hint of foreign influence the framers set forth stringent requirements, more stringent
than for any other official positions within the United States government. The President of the
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
2/16
2
United States, they demanded, must be more than just a citizen. A citizen could be naturalized
after arriving from another country. A citizen could be born to foreign parents within the United
States soil. In either of these scenarios, this new "citizen" would, at least to some extent, hold
allegiances to foreign nations.
It was with this knowledge that the framers built in a more stringent requirement for
POTUS. The President would need to be a "natural born citizen." The term "natural born
citizen" was one who was born to two citizen parents. This term, used only once throughout the
entire Constitution, is the built in safeguard that the framers included to ensure that no foreign
influence would be allowed into the highest office of the United States.
THE LAW
Any discussion of eligibility must begin with the original text. Article II, Sec. 1, Cl. 5 of
the Constitution states:
"No Person except 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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have
attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within
the United States."
As set forth below, it is clear based on the laws of statutory interpretation that there is a separate
and distinct meaning to the term "natural born citizen." It was with the specific intent of
distancing the President from foreign influence that the framers included this requirement. The
Supreme Court, in previously defining this term, has recognized the differences in the
terminology and has established that a "natural born citizen" is one who was born to two citizen
parents. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875). In this landmark case, the Supreme Court
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
3/16
3
ruled that, "it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its
citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also."Id. at 167.
I. The Intent Of The Framers Of The Constitution Establish That "Natural Born Citizens"
Are Those Born Within The Territory Of The United States To Two Citizen Parents
A. Under The Principles of Statutory Construction, The Term "Natural Born Citizen"
Must Be Defined Differently And Thus Has A Different Meaning Than The Term
"Citizen"
It is a fundamental principle of statutory interpretation that where two different and
distinct terms have been used, each is to be given its own meaning. "As always, "`[w]here there
is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general
one, regardless of the priority of enactment.' ... Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 550 -551
(1974). . . Any argument that a federal court is empowered to exceed the limitations [of a
statute]. . . without plain evidence of congressional intent to supersede those sections ignores our
longstanding practice of construing statutes in pari materia. See United States v. United
Continental Tuna Corp., 425 U.S. 164, 168 -169 (1976); Train v. Colorado Public Interest
Research Group, 426 U.S. 1, 24(1976)." Crawford v. Gibbons, 482 U.S. 437, 445.
The rationale behind this rule is based on the intent of the statute's drafters. When
undertaking the important task of crafting law, the drafters of a statute certainly choose their
words carefully. The drafters' goal is to create a statement of the law that is as clear and concise
as possible. Thus, when an idea has been memorialized in one word or phrase, the drafter uses
that one word or phrase, and it alone, to communicate the idea, since the use of two or more
words or phrases would risk creating an interpretive ambiguity that would threaten to defeat
purposes of the law being drafted. It is the application of this principle that gives rise to the
question presently before this court.
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
4/16
4
No statutory drafters undertook their task with greater care than the framers of the
Constitution of the United States. Seeking to establish a new form of government, the framers
engaged in over four months of rigorous debate. The fact that the result of their efforts spans a
mere four pages is a testament to the framers' commitment to concisely stating the law and proof
of their intention that every word be given meaning. Thus, the requirement that the President be
a "natural born Citizen," a phrase used nowhere else in the Constitution, must be given a
meaning distinct from the term "citizen," a word employed on its own ten times within the
Constitution.
The context in which the framers use the unique phrase "natural born Citizen" further
establishes their intention that it be distinguished from the term "citizen." Under Article II of the
Constitution, eligibility to be President is only open to those who are "a natural born Citizen, or a
Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution". This two-pronged
approach to satisfying the citizenship requirement for presidential eligibility clearly establishes
the fact that the framers contemplated a future citizen class distinct from "a Citizen of the United
States." A "natural born Citizen" must, therefore, possess qualifications that "a Citizen of the
United States" was unable to attain "at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution." Thus, it is
necessary to identify these qualifications in order to define "natural born Citizen".
Firstly, naturalization must be eliminated as a means of attaining "natural born Citizen"
status because it was through naturalization that all "Citizens of the United States, at the time of
the Adoption of this Constitution" became citizens, having previously been citizens of England
or their various countries of origin. Therefore, it would be unnecessary to specify the two modes
of acquiring citizenship. By eliminating naturalization, only two qualifications for "natural born
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
5/16
5
Citizen" status can remain: birth within the territory of the United States and two United States
citizen parents.
The first qualification of a "natural born Citizen," birth within the territory of the United
States, could not have been attained by anyone prior to the founding of our country. Since the
United States was hardly more than a decade old at the time the Constitution was drafted, the
only persons that would meet this qualification would have been far too young to serve as
President, thus necessitating the provision for "Citizens of the United States, at the time of the
Adoption of this Constitution."
The second qualification of a "natural born Citizen," being born to two United States
citizen parents, was similarly unattainable by anyone prior to the founding of our country. This
additional requirement was necessary, however, since many British citizens remained within the
territory of the United States. As explained in greater detail below, the framers were acutely
concerned about the danger of foreign influence in POTUS. By requiring a person to be born to
two United States citizen parents, the framers insured that hostile foreign interests would not be
able to infiltrate the highest office of our fledgling country through a child born to foreign
citizens on United States soil.
B. The Framers' Goals In Restricting Eligibility For The Office Of The President Require
That "Natural Born Citizens" Be Born Within The Territory Of The United States To
Two Citizen Parents
At the time of the drafting of the Constitution, the United States was hardly more than a
decade old. With the Revolutionary War still fresh in their minds, the framers of the
Constitution were acutely aware of the country's susceptibility to foreign influence. In this
regard, the framers were centrally concerned with the Office of the President.
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
6/16
6
On July 25, 1787, in a letter to George Washington, who had been elected to preside over
the Constitutional Convention, future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Jay states:
"Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong
check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national
Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the Americanarmy shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."1
Similarly, in Federalist 68, written in 1788, Alexander Hamilton, who himself was born
outside of the United States, recognized the need for the stringent requirements for the Office of
President of the United States:
"Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should beopposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of
republican government might naturally have been expected to make theirapproaches from more than one querter, but chiefly from the desire in foreignpowers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better
gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the
Union? But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the
most provident and judicious attention."
Federalist 68. The danger contemplated by Jay and Hamilton is very real. As the events of the
past two decades have taught us, hostile foreign powers are actively seeking to infiltrate our
society. Take the example of John Walker Lindh, the young man from California who was
recruited by Al Qaeda and fought against American forces in Afghanistan. Or Jose Padilla, an
American citizen, born in New York, who was arrested on suspicion of plotting to detonate a
"dirty bomb" in Chicago. Through the use of internet chat rooms, message boards and other
interactive websites, terrorist groups continue to spread anti-American messages and recruit new
American adherents to their violent mission to destroy our country.
1Available athttp://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/ldpd/jay/image?key=columbia.jay.10627&p=1&level=1. (last
viewed on June 5, 2012) (Emphasis in original).
http://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/ldpd/jay/image?key=columbia.jay.10627&p=1&level=1http://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/ldpd/jay/image?key=columbia.jay.10627&p=1&level=1http://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/ldpd/jay/image?key=columbia.jay.10627&p=1&level=1http://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/ldpd/jay/image?key=columbia.jay.10627&p=1&level=1 -
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
7/16
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
8/16
8
Situations such as these demonstrate the potential conflicts that could arise as a result of
having a President with too close of ties to another country. With the revolutionary war fresh in
their minds, it is these scenarios that the framers of the Constitution sought to avoid by requiring
that the President be not only born within the territory of the United States, but also that both of
his or her parents be United States citizens. The division of a President's allegiance gives rise to
too great a danger to permit any lesser standard.
II. The Term "Natural Born Citizen" Has Been Historically Understood And Interpreted
To Require Birth Within The Territory Of The United States To Two Citizen Parents
The term that a natural born citizen was one born in the country with two citizen parents,
was the prevalent view of the time. In his landmark treatise "A Treatise on Citizenship,"
Alexander Peter Morse definitively stated the accepted law on "natural born citizen," "A citizen,
in the largest sense, is any native or naturalized person who is entitled to full protection in the
exercise and enjoyment of the so-called private rights. The natural born, or native is one who is
born in the country, of citizen parents." Morse, Alexander Peter,A Treatise on Citizenship pp. xi
(1881) See Exhibit 1(Attached). "Under view of the law of nations, natives, or natural born
citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." Id. at 7.
III. The Supreme Court Has Interpreted The Term "Natural Born Citizen" To Require
Birth Within The Territory Of The United States To Two Citizen Parents
In defining the terms "citizen" and "natural born citizen," the Supreme Court similarly
followed the historical definitions. The definition of "citizen" was declared in the Fourteenth
Amendment as "[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." U.S.
Cons. Amend. 14. "Citizen" was subsequently defined by the Supreme Court inMinor v.
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
9/16
9
Happersettas "a member of the nation, and nothing more."Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162,
166 (1875).
The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, did not alter, or in any way address the
term "natural born citizen." The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted simply to ensure that
African Americans and their children would be considered citizens of the United States. The
Fourteenth Amendment did not alter, nor even address, the presidential requirement of "natural
born citizen."
The Supreme Court has similarly made clear that "citizen" and "natural born citizen"
were two distinct and separate terms. Less than a decade after the passage of the Fourteenth
Amendment, the Supreme Court clarified that" all children born in a country of parents who
were its citizens" were in turn "natural born citizens."Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167
(1875).
The term "natural born citizen" was a more selective classification that required more
than just birth on the soil. Natural born citizenship required both that the child was born on the
soil of the country, and also that the child was required to meet the rule of descent or blood.
The only other Supreme Court case that discusses the differences in the terminology is
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). In Wong Kim Ark, the definition of
"natural born citizen" was repeated from the earlierMinordecision. The Chinese parents of
Wong Kim Ark were working within San Francisco, CA when their son was born. The parents
had established a "permanent domicile and residence in the United States." The Court ruled that
since the child's parents were not working as diplomats, and had no further allegiance to China,
that the child was a "citizen" at birth. Yet the Wong Kim ArkCourt decided only that the child
was a "citizen" as the litigants did not argue and the Court did not consider, claims that the child
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
10/16
10
was a "natural born citizen." Simply put, the definition of "natural born citizen" was not before
the Court. The case only decided that the child was born a citizen, while at the same time
reaffirming the definition of "natural born citizen" that was previously described inMinor.
It is clear based on the decisions of bothMinorand Wong Kim Arkthat the Supreme
Court has recognized the differing terms and differing meanings. Moreover, the Court also
defined "natural born citizen" as a child born to two citizen parents. No decision from that point
on, or Constitutional amendment, has ever altered the meaning that was understood at that
particular time. The requirements for "natural born citizen" still remain as being born in the
United States to two citizen parents. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162; Morse, Alexander Peter,
A Treatise on Citizenship.
CONCLUSION
Under the rules of statutory construction, the unique phrase "natural born Citizen"
contained in Article II of the Constitution must be defined differently than the term "citizen." In
order to define this phrase, it is necessary to examine the context in which the phrase is
employed as well as sources outside the Constitution as the Supreme Court found in Minor, since
the Constitution does not contain definitions of its terms. By examining the context of the phrase
"natural born Citizen" and the goals of the framers of the Constitution, it becomes clear that a
"natural born Citizen" is one who is both born within the territory of the United States and born
to two United States citizen parents. This definition is reflected in the common law of England
in effect at the time of the drafting of the Constitution and thus has been confirmed by the
Supreme Court of the United States.
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
11/16
11
Based on Supreme Court precedent, and the reasoning presented above, this court must
hold that presidential eligibility, under Article II of the United States Constitution, requires both
birth within the territory of the United States, as well as birth to two United States citizen
parents.
Dated: June 11, 2012
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Larry Klayman
Larry Klayman, Esq.
F.L. Bar No. 246220
Klayman Law Firm2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: (310) 595-0800
Email: [email protected]
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
12/16
Exhibit 1
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
13/16
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
14/16
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
15/16
-
7/31/2019 Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Natural Born Citizen Brief
16/16
CERTIFICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been served by email and the U.S.
mail this 11th day of June, 2012 to the following:
Hon. Terry P. LewisCircuit Judge
Leon County Courthouse
Room 301-C301 S. Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Daniel Nordy
Ashley E. Davis
Florida Department of State
R.A. Gray Building
500 South Bronough StreetTallahassee, FL 32399
Mark Herron
Joseph Brennan Donnelly
Robert J. Telfer, III
Messer, Caparello & Self, P.A.Post Office Box 15579
Tallahassee, FL 32317
Stephen F. Rosenthal
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, FL 33130-1720
Richard B. Rosenthal
The Law Offices of Richard B. Rosenthal, P.A.169 East Flagler Street, Suite 1422
Miami FL 33131
James A. PetersOffice of the Attorney General
FL-01, The Capital
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050
Counsel for Defendants
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Larry Klayman
Larry Klayman, Esq.F.L. Bar No. 246220
Klayman Law Firm
2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006Tel: (310) 595-0800
Email: [email protected]