Thursday, March 25, 2010

Atty Apuzzo & CDR Kerchner on Let's Talk Liberty Radio Show hosted by Chalice Jackson - Thurs, 25 Mar 2010, 9:30 p.m. EST

Atty Mario Apuzzo and CDR Kerchner were on on the Let's Talk Liberty Show on Thursday, 25 March 2010, hosted by Chalice Jackson of the Patriot's Heart Network. Topics discussed: Appellant's Reply Brief filing on March 23rd with the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA for the Kerchner v Obama & Congress lawsuit, Request for Oral Arguments, and the case status and issues in general. The show aired from 9-11 p.m. EST. Atty Apuzzo and CDR Kerchner will join the show at 9:30 p.m. EST. Below is the direct link to the Let's Talk Liberty radio show at BlogTalkRadio.com:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotsheartnetwork/2010/03/26/lets-talk-liberty

Link for information on the recent filing with the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/03/kerchner-reply-brief-and-oral-argument.html

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Commander USNR (Retired)
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner v Obama & Congress
Please if you can, visit this site and donate to help the cause: http://www.protectourliberty.org
####

2 comments:

jayjay said...

Both guys??? That's great ... twice as much information as well as three times as much fun.

I hope lots of people will be both tuned and attuned. Chalice is usually a very good hostess, so I'm certainly looking forward to it.

Sallyven said...

I look forward to the broadcast tonight.

Mario and Charles, I hope you do not mind me posting my reply to an earlier blog entry here:

The case I referred to in the comments on the last post: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/23/justices-to-weigh-citizenship-rule/

while not specifically addressing "natural born" citizenship, nevertheless is a case to be heard by SCOTUS which will undoubtedly address citizenship in the broader sense in order to reach a decision.

There are many Constitutional scholars who feel that the current practical application of our citizenship law is incorrect. Go to the Heritage Foundation or the Center for Immigration Studies and search for articles on "Birthright citizenship".

Look at the recent case of Hamdi v Rumsfeld--in it, I believe it was Justice Scalia who called Hamdi a "presumed" citizen.

Also note in the Times article, that the Obama administration argued that this new case should not be heard. Interesting.

And as we all know, immigration reform is heating up.

As I have said before, if one simply connects the dots--If the very concept of birthright citizenship is unconstitutional...then it would be impossible for such a person, granted this type of citizenship at birth, to ever be considered "natural born." The framers most likely did not envision automatic citizenship to the child of a foreigner who never naturalized, and much less would the framers consider this child more eligible for future Presidency than a “citizen” eligible only for Congress, just by virtue of being born here.

The founders and framers correctly understood the concepts of citizenship, consent, and allegiance. As did the participants at this 2005 Congressional Hearing: http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju23690.000/hju23690_0.htm

I am sure Bauer and friends will be closely watching this case.