Chief justice accepts ‘eligibility’ petition

Roberts agrees to read Obama docs, consider WND’s 330,000 signers

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A California attorney lobbying the U.S. Supreme Court for a review of Barack Obama’s qualifications to be president confronted the chief justice yesterday with legal briefs and a WND petition bearing names of over 325,000 people asking the court to rule on whether or not the sitting president fulfills the Constitution’s “natural-born citizen” clause.

According to Orly Taitz, the attorney who confronted Chief Justice John Roberts at a lecture at the University of Idaho, the judge promised before the gathered crowd that he would, indeed, read and review the briefs and petition.

“I addressed him in front of 800 people in the audience,” Taitz told WND, “including university officials, the president of the Idaho State Bar and the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Idaho, and in front of all them, [Roberts] promised to read my papers.”

Roberts was lecturing on Abraham Lincoln to approximately 1,200 attendees of the annual Bellwood Memorial Lecture Series at the Moscow, Idaho, university. Roberts has been chief justice of the Supreme Court since his nomination by President George W. Bush and subsequent confirmation in 2005.

Earlier in the week, Taitz confronted Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who told her the issue of Obama’s eligibility, which has been raised before the Supreme Court at least four times but has yet to be given a single hearing, still lacked the votes of the required four justices in conference before it would be officially heard.

Taitz said, “I told Scalia that I was an attorney that filed Lightfoot v. Bowen that Chief Justice Roberts distributed for conference on Jan. 23 and now I represent nine state reps and 120 military officers, many of them high ranked, and I want to know if they will hear Quo Warranto and if they would hear it on original jurisdiction, if I bring Hawaii as an additional defendant to unseal the records and ascertain Obama’s legitimacy for presidency.”

The legal phrase Quo Warranto essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto “affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents.”


Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 325,000 others and sign up now!

“Tell me what to do, what can I do?” Taitz reports asking Scalia. “Those soldiers [her plaintiffs] can be court-martialed for asking a legitimate question, who is the president, is he legitimate?”

She says Scalia responded, “Bring the case, I’ll hear it, I don’t know about others.”

In Idaho, Taitz obtained the promise of one of the others, the chief justice, that he would read through the eligibility challenge, including the petition brought by WND readers.



As WND reported, Taitz is submitting a motion to the Supreme Court for re-hearing of Lightfoot v. Bowen, a case she is working on through her foundation Defend Our Freedoms, alleging some of her documentation may have been withheld from the justices by a court clerk.

Orly Taitz
Orly Taitz

She asserts docketing information about her case “was erased from the docket of the Supreme Court on January 21st, one day after the inauguration and two days before [the case was to be heard].”

At the lecture in Idaho, Taitz grabbed the attention of Justice Roberts by boldly addressing her allegation that a clerk had buried the case.

Taitz told WND that the forum rules required that those questioning Roberts announce their relationship to the University of Idaho and refrain from talking about cases currently before or likely to appear before the court.

“I said, ‘Justice Roberts, my name is Orly Taitz. I’m an attorney from California, and I got up at 3 o’clock in the middle of the night, flew and drove thousands of miles just to ask you a question. So please give me some leeway,'” Taitz told WND. “My question is, do you know there is illegal activity going on in the Supreme Court of the United States?”

According to Taitz, the room was stunned silent as she continued, “I have presented my case to you, and you personally agreed to hear this case in conference. But your clerk refused to forward a supplemental brief to you. He has hidden this brief from you. He refused to put it on the docket. Additionally, my case was erased from the docket one day after the Inauguration, two days before my case was to be heard.

“Outraged citizens and members of the media and state representatives are calling the Supreme Court, demanding to have the case reentered on the docket,” Taitz told Roberts.

Then she held up the WND petition and continued, “Moreover, here are the names of U.S. citizens who signed this petition and who sent individual letters to individual justices, including you, Justice Roberts, all of them demanding the same thing – that you hear my case in regards to Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility for presidency.”

According to Taitz, Roberts approached the microphone and said, “I see you have papers. I promise you I will read all your papers, I will review them. Please give them to my Secret Service and I will review all of them.”

Shortly thereafter, Taitz told WND, a Secret Service agent identified by his badge as Gilbert Shaw accepted two suitcases of documents and pledged to deliver them to Roberts.

Taitz reports the documents included four major sections:

  • A motion for reconsideration of Lightfoot v. Bowen with all its supplemental briefs.
  • The Quo Warranto Easterling et al v. Obama et al case.
  • The WND petition, consisting of 3,300 pages of names – over 325,000 in all – of people demanding the Supreme Court hear the Obama eligibility case.
  • A copy of a 164-page dossier sent to Attorney General Eric Holder detailing suspected criminal activity surrounding Obama and his supporters, also available on the Defend Our Freedoms website.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, 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.”

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, some suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Although Obama officials have told WND all such allegations are “garbage,” here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama’s eligibility:

  • New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn’t properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.
  • Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.
  • Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
  • Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut’s secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
  • Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case was dismissed by Judge Michael P. Kenny.
  • Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama’s vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
  • Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama’s citizenship. His case was denied.
  • In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
  • Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.
  • In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama’s citizenship. The case was denied.
  • In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama’s birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia’s secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
  • California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.


OBAMA WATCH: White House grabs 2010 census power. Huh? WHY??

GOP warns Democrats attempting unconstitutional vote manipulation

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


In a move with major political implications for voting, districting and representation in future elections, the Obama administration has demanded oversight of the 2010 U.S. census.

The move has Republicans crying foul, alleging that transferring the power of census-taking from the Commerce Department, which normally oversees the U.S. Census Bureau, to the White House is an attempt to manipulate redistricting of congressional seats. 

“This action appears to be motivated by politics, rather than the interests of our country,” House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, said in a statement. “The United States Census should remain independent of politics; it should not be directed by political operatives working out of the White House.”

The Washington Post’s Mary Ann Akers reports a senior Republican aide telling her that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has no business overseeing the headcount that will shape the future of U.S. elections.

“With all of its political implications,” the aide reportedly said, “hijacking the census from the Commerce Department and letting it be run out of Rahm’s office is like putting PETA in charge of issuing hunting permits.”

Congressional Quarterly reports that Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the top Republican on the House Government Reform Committee, said the proposed move may even be in violation of federal law.

“Any attempt by the Obama administration to circumvent the census process for their political benefit will be met with fierce opposition,” said Issa. “This ill-conceived proposal undermines a constitutionally obligated process that speaks to the very heart of our democracy.”

Congressional Quarterly reports that Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the top Republican on the House Government Reform Committee, said the proposed move may even be in violation of federal law.

“Any attempt by the Obama administration to circumvent the census process for their political benefit will be met with fierce opposition,” said Issa. “This ill-conceived proposal undermines a constitutionally obligated process that speaks to the very heart of our democracy.”

Congressional Quarterly reports that Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the top Republican on the House Government Reform Committee, said the proposed move may even be in violation of federal law.

“Any attempt by the Obama administration to circumvent the census process for their political benefit will be met with fierce opposition,” said Issa. “This ill-conceived proposal undermines a constitutionally obligated process that speaks to the very heart of our democracy.”

Bruce Chapman, director of the U.S. Census Bureau under President Reagan, explains the Republican objection and why the census is so important in his Discovery blog:

“Everyone knows that it is possible to organize a decennial census in a way that benefits one party or another politically,” Chapman writes. “One way to effectuate this otherwise unpalatable departure from the Census Bureau’s 200-year history of non-partisanship is to put the Bureau administratively under direction of the politicos in the White House. In reality, that would be a sure invitation to cook the books on the highly consequential count of Americans.”

Chapman also claims, “The only reason the White House would want to be involved is in figuring out how to add more voting power to certain states and groups within states.”

The decennial census, taken every 10 years, generates maps and numbers then used to draw congressional districts. Ideally the census director conducts the count in a non-partisan manner under the authority granted by U.S. code to the secretary of Commerce.

Congressional Quarterly, however, announced earlier this week that a senior White House official reported the director of the Census Bureau will now report directly to the White House and not the secretary of Commerce.

CQ later updated its report, stating that the White House “took a small step back from what the senior official told CQ” by announcing that the director of the Census Bureau would “work with the high-level officials rather than report directly to them.”


Those disgraceful DEMS: Stimulus to ban religious worship!!

From our friends at

President Obama’s proposed economic stimulus plan makes a deliberate – and unconstitutional – attempt to censor religious speech and worship on school campuses across the nation, according to a lawyer who argued related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court 20 years ago and won them all.

“This isn’t like a convenient oversight. This is intentional. This legislation pokes its finger in the eyes of people who hold religious beliefs,” Jay Sekulow, chief of the American Center for Law and Justice, told WND today.

His was the organization that decades ago argued on behalf of speech freedom on school campuses, winning repeatedly at the U.S. Supreme Court. Since then, the 2001 Good News Club v. Milford Central School District decision was added, clarifying that restricting religious speech within the context of public shared-use facilities is unconstitutional.

The problem in the proposed stimulus bill comes from a provision that states: “PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS. – No funds awarded under this section may be used for – (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities – (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.”



The wording that specifically targets religious speech already has been approved by the majority Democrats in the U.S. House – all GOP members opposed it. In the Senate, Jim DeMint, R-S.C., proposed an amendment to eliminate it, but again majority Democrats decided to keep the provision targeting religious instruction and activities.

Critics argued schools would accept any money offered, then impose a ban on religious events.

DeMint warned organizations such as the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Campus Crusade for Christ, Catholic Student Ministries, Hillel and other religious groups would face new bans on access to public facilities that would not apply to other organizations.

“This is a direct attack on students of faith, and I’m outraged Democrats are using an economic stimulus bill to promote discrimination,” DeMint said. “Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for siding with the ACLU over millions of students of faith.”

DeMint’s comments have been posted online and also are embedded here:

“These students simply want equal access to public facilities, which is their constitutional right. This hostility toward religion must end. Those who voted to for this discrimination are standing in the schoolhouse door to deny people of faith from entering any campus building renovated by this bill,” said DeMint.

The senator said the stimulus bill now becomes an “ACLU stimulus” that has the goal of triggering lawsuits “designed to intimidate religious organizations across the nation.”

“This language is so vague, it’s not clear if students can even pray in a dorm room renovated with this funding since that is a form of ‘religious worship.’ If this provision remains in the bill, it will have a chilling effect on students of faith in America,” he said.

DeMint cited Obama’s statement at the National Prayer Breakfast this week that faith “can promote a greater good for all of us.”

“This provision is an assault against both. It’s un-American and it’s unconstitutional. Intolerant and it’s intolerable,” DeMint said.

The ban on religious organizations is linked to the $3.5 billion intended for “renovation of public or private college and university facilities.”

The ACLJ, which focuses on constitutional law, said the provision “has nothing to do with economic stimulus and everything to do with religious discrimination.”

“The thing is I litigated these cases on these exact issues 20 years ago,” Sekulow told WND. “Not only did we win, two of the decisions were unanimous and the other was 8-1.

“We’re seeing a rollback to the 1970s regarding church-state relations,” he said. “That’s what is troubling. It is a complete rollback that now institutionalizes discrimination through targeting religion.”

Sekulow said he already is drafting a complaint that will challenge the constitutionality of the provision, to be used if it isn’t removed.

He said under current court precedents, it will be a open-and-shut victory.

However, he also warned that the problem is the damage that can be done within the probable four years it would take to get the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court and what that court would look like at that point.

Under Obama, he said, “there will be an ideology shift.” New appointments to the bench by Obama, he said, would be “much more left of where Justices (Ruth Bader) Ginsburg and (Stephen) Breyer are.”

 On an online forums page, readers were incensed.

  • “Here comes the assault against Christian churches … Looks like he’s trying to see how much damage he can do in the briefest period of time.”
  • “Obama is the most dangerous man of our times, period. He will seek to overturn everything our nation was built upon, personal freedom, capitalism, even the rock of faith. And he will seek to do it from within, openly, overtly and boldly. Will Christians now respond to this dangerous man in a strong, unified way? Or will Obama succeed in destroying the fabric of the greatest nation in human history?”.
  • “He’s just following the Saul Alinsky rule (in his book, Rules for Radicals) to ‘clothe everything you do in morality’ because this is what most effectively fools the ‘middle class’ into agreeing with what you want to do.”

Disgrace:FRHS Board rep steps down because of opposition to do what’s right



~~~~~~~  Advertisement: Visit for the finest pet products, at deep discounted prices: Pet travel gear, hoodies & apparel, grooming products, treats, memory beds, etc…

Family owned and operated: Manalapan, NJ~~~~~~~~



By Joshua Riley • EDUCATION WRITER • January 14, 2009                     

MANALAPAN — Marlboro’s representative on the Freehold Regional High School District Board of Education has resigned after serving for less than a year, saying the politics of some members and a too-powerful team of administrators were getting in the way of good decision-making.

Katie Goon, who was elected to a three-year term in April, read a prepared statement Monday night at the board meeting at Manalapan High School. Her resignation was immediate.

“In the past six months, I have been extremely perturbed by the issues and events that have transpired,” Goon said, referring to the controversy that began in July over five district employees’ receiving district money for obtaining bogus doctoral degrees.

Goon said she holds “sincere hope” that her successor will rise above the politics of the district.

Board President Patricia Horvath did not return calls requesting comment. (Gee I wonder why)

“I’m disappointed,” board member Joan Leimbach said in a telephone interview. “I thought she made a great contribution to the board. It will be a loss.”

Goon’s former seat holds the most voting power of any on the board. The Marlboro representative’s vote counts as 1.6 votes out of nine in the district’s system. In the seat’s vacancy, the board can cast only 7.4 total votes because it uses a weighted voting system.

After previous resignations, the board has announced a vacancy and accepted applications for the seat before appointing a temporary representative. The unexpired two-year term will be filled after the April election.

In August, Goon had asked for the resignation or removal of Superintendent H. James Wasser should he retain the title of “Dr.” or refuse to repay the district tuition and salary paid for his doctorate from a so-called diploma mill, Breyer State University.Wasser was ordered by state officials to relinquish his title. He cooperated. He stopped receiving higher pay when he dropped his title in September, yet he did not repay tuition payments or salary increases that the district had already paid. Wasser remains superintendent.


During a telephone interview Tuesday, Goon said other board members have feared for themselves and their family members in making decisions for the district. She declined to elaborate.
During a telephone interview, Goon said her voice was not enough to overcome the will of the administration.

As further disservice to district taxpayers, Goon said, two board members for whom a family member works in the district are excluded from representing their municipality on issues of employee contracts.

“There is a lot of power in the administration, and I don’t think the board members stand up to it,” she said.

At Monday’s meeting, Marlboro residents continued to criticize Wasser over the degree and chide the board for inaction.

Goon read her statement at the end of a 2‚1/2-hour meeting. She signed the statement, and the board accepted her resignation.

Freehold: Districts try to put brakes on spending

FROZEN: Schools chiefs must veto the nonessential

Advertisment: PAWS4 – NJ Pet Supply Factory: New Jersey’s Best Pet Products, at NJ’s Best Prices. Family owned and Operated
By Joshua Riley and Jennifer Bradshaw

As of 4 p.m. today, the Freehold Township School District’s budget will be frozen.

All purchase orders — typically filed electronically for the business administrator’s review — now have to be approved by Superintendent William J. Setaro. He will now ask the budget managers to justify the requested purchase.

The new practice is the district’s way of answering the state’s call to freeze non-essential spending for the rest of the school year during the tough national economic climate.

But defining nonessential spending may be difficult for districts, which have complete control over reducing costs.

“What’s essential in the eyes of the state is not always what’s essential in the eyes of parents,” said Middletown schools’ business administrator Bill Doering.

State Education department spokesman Rich Vespucci defined “nonessential” as any expenditures outside of instruction or contracted payments.

Every school district has discretionary spending that can be cut during this “unprecedented hard time,” Vespucci said. The school board should meet the questions and concerns of the public on these spending cuts and how they are to be applied, he said.

At Freehold Township schools, not every item will be on the chopping block. A class trip already booked but not paid for, for example, will still be allowed, Setaro said. He also hopes to go forward with air conditioning projects at the Clifton T. Barkalow Middle School and the Joseph J. Catena Elementary School.

“We’ll certainly be reviewing to see if anything can be cut, (but) we feel that anything we do is essential,” Freehold Regional High School District spokeswoman Ilse Whisner said.

Any cuts would be up to the district’s board of education, she said.

In Middletown, Doering will review the district’s budget along with Superintendent Karen Bilbao for possible areas of a spending freeze.

Some districts, however, had already scaled back their spending.

Toms River Regional School District Superintendent Michael Ritacco said gasoline prices had caused the district to tighten spending earlier this school year. The district plans to cut back by postponing some equipment purchases, copier machines for example, that were recommended but not immediately necessary, Ritacco said.

“We tried to limit our spending to absolute necessity,” he said. “This year’s budget process is going to be extremely difficult.”

In Holmdel, schools have already been implementing spending freezes in certain areas of the budget, such as general supplies, business administrator Michael Petrizzo said.

While the Jan. 16 letter from the state Education Commissioner Lucille E. Davy does not come as a surprise to the district, it is a “telling sign” of the times, he said.

Advertisment: PAWS4   NJ’s best Pet Supplies, NJ’s best prices

Staff writer Kim Predham contributed to this article.

Freehold Regional HS District: Teachers pay increase rescinded due to “the diploma mill”


For your next school, team, or event fund-raiser, consider Gourmet Coffee that’s always roasted to order, Gourmet Teas, or small gourmet gift sets. Earn 50% profit

CLICK HERE to find out more


Teachers lose diploma-mill pay bump

Had used same school as superintendent

By Joshua Riley • EDUCATION WRITER • December 10, 2008

The Freehold Regional High School District has cut back the salaries of two more staffers because they had received doctoral degrees from an unaccredited diploma mill.

Board Attorney Lawrence Schwartz announced that action during another tense public-comment session at a board meeting Monday in the Englishtown administration building.

English teacher Cheryl A. Lanza of Freehold and teacher consultant Lorraine Taddei-Graef of Lacey work at Freehold Township High School and had both received pay raises upon obtaining doctoral degrees from Breyer State University, the same school that issued degrees to Superintendent H. James Wasser, former Assistant Superintendent Frank J. Tanzini and current Assistant Superintendent Donna Evangelista.

Their salaries have since been reduced to a master’s degree level. Lanza was paid $58,385 with a master’s salary in 2007, nearly $5,000 less than she had earned with a doctorate this year, public records show.

Taddei-Graef was paid $66,530 with a doctorate degree in 2007 and was to be paid $73,620 during the 2008-09 school year.

Wasser had received a pay bump as well, but stopped receiving the extra stipend after the state ordered that he, Tanzini and Evangelista drop their doctoral titles in early September.

Lanza and Taddei-Graef were ordered to drop their titles in October.

Public outrage was sparked in July when the Asbury Park Press began reporting on Wasser’s degree.

Since then, the board has struggled to maintain decorum at its public meetings while a diminishing group of residents has strived to glean information. The discord continued during Monday night’s board meeting.

Jim Sage of Marlboro, a critic of the board and district administration, asked board President Patricia Horvath if Lanza and Taddei-Graef had ceased receiving the salary bump associated with the degree.

Horvath answered firmly but ambiguously: “The issue has been addressed and it has been taken care of.”

Sage said that was no answer, and Board Attorney Lawrence Schwartz returned Horvath’s answer, verbatim.

Agitated, Sage spoke louder, stating that the public has a right to know. Anger escalated as another attendee shouted that the teachers should be given formal notice before Sage gets a public answer. A security guard began to approach Sage.

Schwartz answered, quelling the fervor: the teachers’ salaries have been returned to a master’s degree scale, he said, adding that the teachers did nothing improper.

Some attendees posed questions about employee repayment for the tuition paid to Breyer State and received no answer. About 15 members of the public attended, though not all were critical of the board.

The board will meet Monday at Marlboro High School, 95 N. Main St. An executive session starts at 7 p.m., and the board expects to start the public meeting at 8 p.m.

Joshua Riley: (732) 308-7751 or



By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

An associate lawyer in a Chicago-based firm whose partner served on a finance committee for then-Sen. Barack Obama has advocated for the elimination of the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born” citizen, calling the requirement “stupid” and asserting it discriminates, is outdated and undemocratic.

The paper was written in 2006 by Sarah Herlihy, just two years after Obama had won a landslide election in Illinois to the U.S. Senate. Herlihy is listed as an associate at the Chicago firm of Kirkland & Ellis. A partner in the same firm, Bruce I. Ettelson, cites his membership on the finance committees for both  Obama and Sen. Richard Durbin on the corporate website.

The article by Herlihy is available online under law review articles from Kent University.

The issue is the subject of nearly two dozen court cases in recent weeks, including at least two that have gone to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Top grade Kenya AA Coffee Roasted to Order – BUY IT HERE

Barack Obama and Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga

Barack Obama and Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga

There have been accusations that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as his campaign has stated. His paternal grandmother has stated she was in attendance at his birth in Mombasa. While Hawaii officials say they have seen his birth certificate, they have declined to release information from it.




The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution,1
undecidedly un-American,”2 “blatantly discriminatory,”3 and the “Consti-tution’s worst provision.”4 Since Arnold Schwarzenegger’s victory in the California gubernatorial recall election of 2003, commentators and policy-makers have once again started to discuss whether Article II of the United States Constitution should be amended to render naturalized citizens eligi-
for the presidency.5 Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution defines the eligibility requirements for an individual to become president. Article II provides:
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 Of-fice who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.6
Although these sixty-two words are far from extraordinary, the natural born citizen provision is controversial because it prevents over 12.8 million Americans from being eligible for the presidency.7 In addition to Governor

This is very lengthy – read it HERE