Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
____________________________________
Charles F. Kerchner, Jr, : Document Electronically Filed
Lowell T. Patterson, :
Darrell James LeNormand, and :
Donald H. Nelsen, Jr., :
:
Plaintiffs-Appellants, :
:
v. :
:
Barack Hussein Obama II, President Elect :
of the United States of America, President : Case No. 09-4209
of the United States of America, :
and Individually, a/k/a Barry Soetoro; :
United States of America; :
United States Congress; :
United States Senate; :
United States House of Representatives; :
Richard B. Cheney, President of :
the Senate, Presiding Officer of Joint :
Session of Congress, Vice President of the : MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
United States and Individually; and : FILE SUPPLEMENTAL
Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House and : APPENDIX
Individually, :
:
Defendants-Appellees. :
____________________________________:
while the issue before the Court is one of standing and political question, the
merits of plaintiffs’ claims are important to the showing that plaintiffs must
make to prove that they have standing. The importance of the merits of
Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct. App.
2009). We realize that the Ankeny case is a state court decision and not
only case in the United States that, although not necessary to its decision and
an Article II “natural born Citizen,” finding that “persons born within the
borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II,
688. In the Ankeny case, the Indiana Court of Appeals was faced with the
2
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
question of whether the trial court was correct in dismissing the pro se
plaintiffs’ complaint under Trial Rule 12(B)(6) for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted. Id. at 680. The court stated that “[w]hen
reviewing a motion to dismiss, the court views the pleadings in the light
construed in the nonmovant’s favor.” Id. at 680. The district court in the
Kerchner case said that it was following the same standard on defendants’
Rule 12(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P. motion to dismiss for lack of standing. A-10
to 11. The Ankeny court also said that it “need not accept as true any
Id. at 689. Hence, because the court did not agree with the merits of
3
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 4 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
refused to accept as true the factual allegations of their complaint. See USA.
v. Spectrum Emergecy Care, 190 F.3d 1156 (10th Cir., 1999) (“unsupported,
Lockheed Missiles & Space, Co., Inc., 995 F.2d 232 (9th Cir. 1993)
therefore address the merits of plaintiffs’ claims before the Court not only
because the merits of their claims are intertwined with the question of
standing but also to show that there is much more evidence of plaintiffs’
born Citizen” and to avoid the possibility that this Court would treat the
pertain to the Opening Brief at pp. 17-29 and the Reply Brief at pp. 6-14
4
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 5 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
historian from South Carolina and a delegate from that state to the
intellectual figure in the early republic, known and respected in America and
abroad for his medical and historical writings, especially for The History of
Worlds: David Ramsay and the Politics of Slavery, J.S.Hist., Vol. L, No. 2
(May 1984).
the former being “under the power of another” and the latter being “a unit of
that “Republics, both ancient and modern, have been jealous of the rights of
States were those who were parties to the Declaration of Independence and
thereby adhered to the revolutionary cause. But the importance of his work
does not stop there, for he also described a “natural born Citizen, whom he
of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is
5
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 6 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
none but the children of those Americans, who, having survived the
that citizenship “as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been
born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776….” Id. at 6. Here, Ramsay
referred to “natural right,” which ties into the Framers’ use of the clause
that in defining a “citizen of the United States” and a “natural born Citizen,”
Ramsay did not look to English common law but rather to natural law, the
an article from George D. Collins, Are Persons Within the United States
determined not by the English common law but rather by the general
principles of the law of nations” with Vattel, in The Law of Nations, Sec.
6
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 7 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
212, providing the rule which explains that the children born in the country
of citizen parents are “natural born citizens,” none of which was changed by
Porter Morse, Natural-Born Citizen of the United States: Eligibility for the
the United States, wherever born, is “‘a natural-born citizen of the United
Is Mr. Charles Evans Hughes a “Natural Born Citizen” Within the Meaning
of the Constitution?” Chicago Legal News, Vol. 146, p. 220 (1916) (there is
United States” is not the same as a “natural born Citizen;” a “natural born
Citizen” is one made by the laws of nature and not by operation of law and
from the moment of birth owes allegiance exclusively to the United States; a
naturally caused by being born in the country to an alien father which causes
the person to acquire one allegiance and citizenship by jus soli and the other
7
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 8 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
citizen by naturalization either upon his father naturalizing before the child
ACLU, 535 U.S. 564, 567 n.2 (2002); Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530
U.S. 640, 692 n.20 (2000) (Stevens, J., dissenting); City of Boerne v. Flores,
521 U.S. 507, 522 (1997); Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 61 n.1 (1992)
(Thomas, J., concurring) (surveying the New York Times, Los Angeles
Times, and Chicago Tribune to show that the public cares about the racial
mix of juries); City of Akron v. Akron Ctr. for Reproductive Health, Inc.,
462 U.S. 416, 457 (1983) (O’Connor, J., dissenting) (citing Washington Post
rule).
s/Mario Apuzzo
Mario Apuzzo
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831
(732) 521-1900
FAX (732) 521-3906
apuzzo@erols.com
8
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 9 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
this matter, certify that on April 10, 2010, I filed the attached motion for
the Clerk of the United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals and that I
served a copy of the same documents upon all other parties to this matter, by
forwarded these materials are set forth below. I also certify that on April 10,
2010, I will place in the United States Postal Service by Express Mail 4 hard
filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at:
Clerk
United States Court of Appeals
For the Third Circuit
21400 US. Courthouse
Independence Mall West
601 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106-1790
9
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096600 Page: 10 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
the document to the United States Postal Service via Federal Express at
10
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 4 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 5 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 6 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 7 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 8 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 9 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 10 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 11 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 12 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 13 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 14 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 15 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 16 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 17 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 18 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 19 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 20 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 21 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 22 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 23 Date Filed: 04/10/2010
Case: 09-4209 Document: 003110096603 Page: 24 Date Filed: 04/10/2010