Amicus Brief on "What Is a Natural Born Citizen?" for the January 26, 2012 Georgia Presidential Eligibility Case

Leo Donofrio
 http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
files a welcome and detailed Amicus Brief


On January 23, 2012,
       New Jersey Attorney Leo Donofrio issued this statement:

This morning, I filed an AMICUS BRIEF in the Georgia POTUS eligibility cases.

The brief complies with all Rules and procedures of the Administrative Court.  The brief is 54 pages, and the appendix is 155 pages. The Rules of Court require attachment to the brief of all legal authorities, other than those issued by the federal government, or the State of Georgia. There’s some very esoteric law attached thereto.

 

I seriously urge everyone to familiarize themselves with Lord Coke’s Report from Calvin’s Case, as well as Chancellor Ellesmere’s argument, also in Calvin’s Case, for this is the true common law genesis of jus soli subjection, which happens to be a uniquely Christian tenet of law that has been completely misunderstood in this country for too long now. Calvin’s Case is universally recognized as the common law precedent relating to jus soli, but it is so much more fascinating than you can imagine. And it will forever revolutionize understanding of the words “natural-born”.

This book contains all of the relevant arguments and reports. But the original text of Lord Coke’s Report is the proper starting point. (This document is also in the appendix to my brief.) And here’s another source with slightly modernized English and extras.

Leo Donofrio 

AMICUS BRIEF by Leo Donofrio in Georgia Presidential Eligibility Case


A very great THANK YOU to Leo for all his research and detailed information.
 
  Thank you for your very welcome and invited participation in the HISTORIC proceeding. 

I encourage all readers who are interested in the debate on what is or is not a UNITED STATES Natural Born Citizen, to read this Amicus brief.  It takes the discussion to a whole new level and is worth the read.

-- Brianroy



{{{{{  Update --- January 25, 2012    INS Interprets  324.2(b)   which converts as 8 US Code 1435  as there being a clear distinction between the definitions of a US Natural Born Citizen from that of a US Native Born to the same degree these are distinctive from a US Naturalized Citizen.  -- Hat Tip to Leo Donofrio, who writes:
 

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/the-current-ins-officially-recognizes-a-delineation-between-natural-born-and-native-born/

Interpretation 324.2(b) provides:

“The effect of naturalization under the above statutes was not to erase the previous period of alienage, but to restore the person to the status if naturalized, native, or natural-born citizen, as determined by her status prior to loss.” (Emphasis added.)

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45077/0-0-0-48438.html

Three times in this official INS Interpretation – currently published by the Obama Administration – native-born and natural-born are given separate consideration. And in the third example – from Interpretation 324.2(b) – the INS clearly states that each delineation, “naturalized, native, or natural-born citizen“, is a separate status.

January 25

End of update }}}}}