by Sharon Rondeau

(Jul. 12, 2019) — As he has in the past, New York State citizen Robert Laity on Friday sent a letter to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, copied to all members of that body, captioned, “Usurpations of the Presidency by fraud and subterfuge; Petition for Redress of Grievances.”

Laity’s letter begins, “It is with intense concern for this nation’s national security that I write to you today. I have written to this court on this issue before, over a decade ago. I have also had two cases before this court on this issue.”

As Laity further noted, he filed a lawsuit originating in the State of New York challenging the presidential eligibility of Barack Obama and more recently, a case claiming that three 2016 presidential candidates were ineligible for the office they sought.

“Since 2008 there has been demonstrated a pattern of usurpations by constitutionally barred individuals to attain, by fraudulent means, to the Presidency of the United States of America,” Laity’s letter continues, citing “Article II, Section I, Clause 5” of the U.S. Constitution, known as the “natural born Citizen” clause.

Laity quoted the court’s 1875 opinion in Minor v. Happersett, which stated 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. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”

On page 2, Laity listed those he believes were and are ineligible to serve as President of the United States, including Obama, the late Sen. John McCain, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, and current presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Tulsi Gabbard.

Harris, who is serving her first term in the U.S. Senate from the State of California, was born in Oakland to parents who almost undoubtedly were then citizens of the countries from which they came. Based on her public biography, neither of her parents could have resided in the United States long enough to apply for citizenship. Her father, Stanford University Emeritus Prof. Donald Harris, states on his website that he did, in fact, become a U.S. citizen but not the year in which he was naturalized.

As has recently been unearthed by The Post & Email’s Joseph DeMaio, Gabbard was born in American Samoa to two U.S. citizen parents. American Samoa is an unincorporated territory and, DeMaio reported, a U.S. Supreme Court decision found that only incorporated territories are subject to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

Further, DeMaio found, as a “U.S. national,” Gabbard may not be constitutionally eligible to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives, where she currently represents Hawaii’s second congressional district.

“I move this court to exercise it’s [sic] original jurisdiction authority and take affirmative action to stop this ongoing pattern of unconstitutional incursion into the office of the Presidency of our sovereign nation by persons whom which the founders never intended to admit to said office,” Laity’s letter concludes.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. https://www.constitution.org/abus/pres_elig.htm :

    >Barry Soetoro-Obama II, not eligible to be a U.S. President since his FOREIGN BEHAVIOR and his released fraudulent documents and sealed (fraudulent?) documents and U.S. Government cover-ups et al never satisfied Obama’s personal burden of proof of eligibility

    >John McCain not eligible since not born on U.S. jurisdiction and U.S. Government cover-ups and death

    >Rafael Cruz not eligible since not born on U.S. soil and joint U.S. Government and Texas BAR cover-ups

    >Hillary Clinton not eligible since a fugitive criminal of RICO and U.S. Government cover-ups

    Virtually our entire U.S. Government 08-28-08- TODAY is an indictable criminal enterprise for usurping and covering-up mandatory “nbC 1789”, don’t you think?

    REMEMBER 08-28-08 >>> https://canadafreepress.com/2009/williams091209.htm

  2. I have been giving Thinkwell’s argument a lot of thought. Seems as though a dual citizen, who has allegiances to two nations, would have to renounce the citizenship of the foreign nation before he/she could be considered a fully allegianced citizen of the U.S. Foreigners when they naturalize do renounce their foreign allegiances. Dual citizens must do the same or they are not sole allegiance citizens of the U.S. which you must be to beget an NBC. Makes sense? I thank Thinkwell for making me cogitate further on this issue.

  3. I read the link provided by Thinkwell. It is Naturalization law. Naturalized citizens cannot be President or VP. While U.S. Citizens are all U.S.Nationals, Dual citizenship citizen/nationals have dual allegiances., to the U.S. and to the foreign nation and are not 100% of the soil (Jus soli) and 100% of the blood (Jus sanquinis) OF Americans. The child of dual citizen parents is not an NBC of the U.S. since he/she possesses less then 100% Jus soli and 100% Jus sanquinis. The founder’s understanding of what an NBC is was clear. It was affirmed by SCOTUS as well. I DO claim that dual citizens cannot beget an NBC. SCOTUS HAS defined what an NBC is and it is in perfect harmony with the definition of NBC that the founders relied on. The court even admitted that they had to reach elsewhere then Art.II since it was not defined there. It was defined in Vattel, however. That is the definition the founders relied on and that is what the SCOTUS affirmed as the meaning of NBC. The law does not deal in hypotheticals. It deals with fact. A judge is a finder of law. A jury is the trier of fact.

  4. Message posted on White House and DOJ websites today:


    1. The U.S. Constitution and its 27 Amendments (“Constitution”) is the only supreme law of USA (sharia law is seditious)

    2. U.S. Government and all U.S.-citizens must follow the U.S. Constitution or amend it; to do otherwise is “unconstitutional” and possibly criminal/punishable.

    3. All U.S. presidential candidates, incumbent presidents and ex-presidents must be a “natural born Citizen”; same for all U.S. Vice-presidents.

    4. All U.S. presidential and vice-presidential candidates must fully identify (“vet”) themselves as a “natural born Citizen” so as to preserve national security and to fully inform all voters.

    5. Nature Rules, and men follow. The U.S. Constitution’s natural law term “natural born Citizen” most undoubtedly means “one’s natural birth within a sole-USA jurisdiction to one’s natural USA citizen-parents” (the pedigree component) so as to attempt to maximize one’s biased “America First” adult-allegiances via minimized foreign allegiances (the philosophy component).

    6. On 08-28-08, America’s first female U.S. Speaker-Traitor and second-in-line to be President pro-tempore, Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi, forged the presIDential eligibility documents of islamic infiltraitor, Barack Hussein Soetoro-Obama II: https://canadafreepress.com/2009/williams091209.htm


    8. On 08-28-09, The Post and Email became the world’s fingertip-accessible daily journal-archive exposing the largest fraud against the American public, being, Fake presIDent Barry Soetoro-Obama II.

    9. https://www.thepostemail.com/2016/01/11/the-post-email-speaks-with-constitutional-attorney-and-scholar-dr-edwin-vieira-on-the-term-natural-born-citizen/ “The only person who could look into this is Trump…he would control the Justice Department…”


  5. Mr. Laity,

    We are on the same side, but apparently I am having trouble making my points clear. Since about fifty years or so ago our government has allowed dual citizenship. If two USA-foreign dual citizens birth a child in the USA, that child will also possess dual citizenship, yet that child will meet the Vattel “bright line” definition of natural born Citizen. Do you claim that such an event is not possible? And, if it is possible, do you recognize how if such a child were to eventually become president, it would defeat the intent of the Constitution’s natural born Citizen requirement?

    Regarding the SCOTUS defining the meaning of natural born Citizen, I believe that is something the founders never envisioned. The Constitution was thoughtfully and deliberately written by articulate, dedicated patriots in plain English to be easily understood by ordinary citizens, not just lawyers or black-robed tyrants. The SCOTUS itself has said many times that the definition of natural born Citizen is a political question that is the responsibility of congress. The SCOTUS will never touch this and, if they ever do, it would likely as not be a disaster.

    Finally, you completely missed the point of my hypothetical thought experiment about a country experiencing a sudden complete halt to the influx of aliens. My hypothetical example is a vehicle of understanding as to what “natural citizen” means. The fact that it never will likely occur is completely irrelevant.

    Information about nationals and citizens and about dual citizenship:

  6. Mr. Mooers,

    Agree completely with your last post. I especially like your first two suggestions (full pardon for LTC Terry Lakin and unseal aka obama’s identity documents). Sadly, I think your last suggestion (arrest aka obama for fraud and usurpation) has no chance until a majority of the nation has been full educated about aka obama’s fraud and usurpation.

  7. Message posted on White House and DOJ websites today:




    AG BARR and DOJ: Virtually every single U.S. Government employee 08-28-08-Today, including AG Barr/DOJ/Supreme Court, is indictable for passively allowing, or actively covering-up , an illegal/unidentified foreign operative/islamic infiltraitor, narrative Barack Hussein Soetoro-Obama II (“Obama”), the government-usurpation of the Office of the President of the United States.

    1. President Trump: REVOKE EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 to unseal the full identity of Obama for all U.S.-citizens

    2. President Trump: PARDON LTC TERRY LAKIN


    OBAMA NEVER WAS, NEVER IS and NEVER WILL BE A 44th CONSTITUTIONAL PRESIDENT because he can never be a “natural born Citizen” (= undoubtedly born in USA jurisdiction to USA citizen-parents) and can never possess a natural foreign-free brain-philosophy: https://www.conservapedia.com/Obamagate_timeline

    Since virtually the entire U.S. Government ( https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43590.pdf ) is complicit with Obama in usurping the natural law of “natural born Citizen” of the U.S. Constitution and its 27 Amendments, and since all U.S. citizens can only follow, or amend, the U.S. Constitution, lest they do otherwise and make themselves common criminals and professional outlawyers, our Constitutional Republic remains legally discontinued 08-28-08- TODAY via the unaccounted Pelosi-Obama Usurpation: https://canadafreepress.com/2009/williams091209.htm

    STOP the fail time, START the jail time with Obama!

  8. Thinkwell, If one’s parents are U.S, Citizens they ARE U.S. Citizens. Their child if born IN the U.S. are therefore “Natural Born Citizen(s)” OF the United States and the United States alone. Please cite the actual law that you refer to that confers other then U.S. Citizenship upon a child born to two U.S. Citizens IN the United States. Such Children have absolutely NO allegiance to any other nation BUT the United States. They ARE of the soil and of the blood of Americans.,100%. Whether “Unreliable” or not the U.S. Supreme Court IS the arbiter of what the law IS! Congress would have to legislate against what the Supreme Court decides should they not agree. Otherwise, the unanimous definition of NBC as determined by SCOTUS IS the law of the land. ALL Natural born citizens are “born a citizen”. However, all persons “born a citizen” are NOT Natural Born Citizens. Finally I doubt that “alien influx” will ever cease since allowing limited Immigration by legal means is in the best interests of the USA. What anyone would personally “Rather” is not the standard. Currently, as per SCOTUS decision, “One born IN the United States to Parents who are both U.S. Citizens themselves” IS the legal standard.

  9. Mr. Laity,

    We seem to be having trouble communicating. Starting in the late 1950s through 1967, the USA started recognizing and allowing dual citizenship in certain situations. This was and is a grievous mistake in my opinion. As a result of this policy change it is possible for a child born in the USA to USA citizen parents to retain foreign citizenship and allegiance. Such a child should be ineligible for the presidency, but the Vattel “bright line” standard does not preclude it. The 100 percent exclusive USA allegiance standard would not allow this.

    A lot of patriots defer to Vattel’s Law of Nations to justify their understanding of the founders’ meaning of natural born Citizen, which is certainly true and correct, but this approach is prone to attack as an argument from authority and can be (wrongly) countered with opposing figures of authority, who are often little more than partisan hacks.

    Another tact is to look to the SCOTUS for enlightenment from prior decisions such as in Minor versus Happersett (which, if read carefully, actually properly defines natural born Citizen). However, this approach is subject to the same weakness as deferring to Vattel – it’s an argument from authority (and the SCOTUS is a rather dubious and unreliable one at that).

    I would rather apply the common sense of the founders, who demanded sole, exclusive allegiance to the USA for presidents and vice presidents (because all the power of the Commander-in-Chief is vested in a single individual). The chance of absolute loyalty is maximized by providing the chief executive must be both a born citizen and a natural citizen, i.e., one whose citizenship depends on no man made law or statute.

    And who would be the natural citizens in a society that had been suddenly completely closed off to alien influx? After just a few generations all hybrid citizen types would die out and only natural born Citizens would remain, i.e., born in-country to 100 percent exclusive citizen parents.

  10. Thinkwell, Those born with dual citizenship cannot be President or VP. People who naturalize, as I said renounce any other citizenship that they have, by taking the naturalization oath. Those born in the U.S. with dual citizenship can never be “Natural born citizen(s)” by any act even when they turn 21. They can renounce the dual citizenship at that age., however they do not by that act, become an NBC. It is birth circumstances that determine that. At this time, whether one is “okay with using ‘born in the US to US Citizen Parents'” or not okay with it, that is the current legal definition.

  11. I support you and your efforts 100% Mr. Laity and will continue to pray for all of us with truth on our side. Whenever I think of CJ roberts looking at this I get frightened to my core. It will be a joyous day if and when he is removed from SCOTUS.

  12. Some opportunists and crafty outlawyers might justify Harris and Cruz and Obama II each as a “natural born Citizen” (nbC) simply because the Founding Fathers did not define nbC, so, some (Democriminals et al) lie-reason, nbC can mean anything at all.

    The Founding Fathers also did not define “pursuit of happiness” which, truthfully, could legally mean anything at all.

    While “happiness” is likely understood by all humanity, conversely, the linkage of “natural-born-Citizen”, I suspect, is rarely even spoken by humanity on planet Earth. This means that “natural born Citizen”, then, is a very discreet phrase with a very discreet meaning at the time of its inclusion in the U.S. Constitution in 1789.

    In gleaning the 85 Federalist papers recently ($7, Dover Thrift), it is evident that the Founding Fathers were a very serious assembly of thinkers. Fast forward from 1789 to 2019 and a mature USA is seen today as not at all so serious about the U.S. Constitution. Our nation is in shabby shape today, in large part, because its leaders are faithless jokers and druggers.

    Could Joke Biden (and son, Coke Biden) prepare any Federalist paper with the seriousness of Alexander Hamilton, with 100% passionate originality and no plagiarism of thought? Or how about the seriousness of Bust Lust Bill Clinton, or Hillary RICO Clinton, or chicken-eyed hysteria Pelosi, or Crack-and-pot crackpot Barry “Choom Gang” Obama II et al?

    Today, to our Founding Fathers’ dismay, our nation’s level of SOVEREIGNTY is directly related to its leaders’ level of SOBRIETY, don’t you think?

    Fortunately, the most serious SOBER leader in USA today is President Donald John Trump.

    Trump (RENOVATION), then, is today’s George Washington (REVOLUTION); Trump is America’s only brief hope of formally defining, AND BODILY EXEMPLIFYING, “natural born Citizen” to mean, just like him (and me), ” born in the USA to USA citizen-parents.”

    While “born in USA to USA citizen-parents” will not guarantee 100% allegiance to USA, because all natural humans are flawed sinners, its formal definition today would reinforce the intentions of 1789 in seriously attempting to limit the invasion of FOREIGN TREASON-THINKING into the highest decision-making office of USA.

    MADE IN USA-“natural born Citizen” made common sense in 1789 and it makes GOOD SENSE in 2019.

  13. Mr. Laity,

    I think you missed my point. I am okay with using “born in the USA to USA citizen parents” as the working “bright line” definition of natural born Citizen because the exceptions I mentioned are so rare. I was just exploring the true purpose and intent behind the nbC requirement and how the qualifying definition might be altered slightly to be more in line with that purpose. Doing so would help people better understand why the nbC requirement exists.

    We could (and should) avoid the dual citizenship problem altogether simply by not allowing our adult citizens to hold dual citizenship (if born with dual citizenship make them naturalize as an exclusive USA citizen upon reaching the age of majority if they wish to retain their USA citizen status).

  14. Thinkwell, The legal definition of an NBC is one born in the United States to parents who are both U.S. Citizens. Period. No exceptions. Grandparents citizenship status is irrelevant as long as bot “Parents” are U.S. Citizens when their child is born ON U.S. soil. A president and a VP MUST have 100% Jus Soli (of the soil of the U.S.) AND 100% Jus Sanquinis (of the blood of U.S. Citizens). No other statutory citizen possesses these qualities. U.S. citizens who are naturalized forswear/renounce any allegiances and citizenships in other nations. It’s part of the oath to become citizens.

    Your argument that one born in international waters or outside the parameters of the U.S. such as outside our airspace is circular. These areas are not U.S. soil. Jus soli is a mandatory criteria in the legally defined definition of NBC “One born IN the United States”. Congress did once say, in 1790, that persons born outside the U.S. to U.S. Citizens were NBCs. Just a mere (5) years later that provision of the 1790 Naturalization Act was REPEALED. Children born outside the U.S. to U.S. citizens are “Citizens” but they are not “Natural born citizens”. John McCain was born outside the U.S. by any stretch of the law. He was born in Colon, Panama which, by treaty, never was part of the Panama Canal Zone. Furthermore, the Panama Canal Zone was never incorporated territory of the United States. Neither is America Samoa,U.S. Virgin Islands, The Mariannas, OR Puerto Rico, The sole fully incorporated territory of the U.S. today is Palmyra Atoll. Those born ON Palmyra Atoll to two U.S. Parents ARE indeed Natural Born U.S. Citizens.

    Those born on a ship sitting in a U.S. Harbor OR WITHIN the 12 mile limit of the U.S. are born IN the United States. Those in International waters are NOT.

  15. Mr. Laity,

    Please consider that “born in the USA to USA citizen parents” is only a mostly correct definition for natural born Citizen of the USA. In fact, it is just a simplified, easy-to-understand “bright line” definition, but one with a few chinks and flaws. The intent is that presidents and VPs be 100 percent exclusively American through and through, totally free of any USA recognized conflicting allegiances at any point in their lives. The “bright line” nbC definition opens the door for some who do not meet this intent and excludes others who do.

    Parents who have USA recognized dual citizenship with another country produce children with conflicting allegiances even though both parents may be USA citizens. This should be a disqualifier. A natural born Citizen may have non-USA recognized dual citizenship through a grandparent. Officially accepting this (or any other) extra citizenship at any point in their lives also should be a disqualifier.

    Children born in international water or air space to 100 percent USA citizen parents are born completely free of any conflicting allegiance and should be considered natural born Citizens. In fact, as long as the place where they are born is free from USA recognized jus soli citizenship claims, such a child should not be disqualified. This means that Tulsi Gabbard should be considered eligible. John McCain may have met this standard, but it is still uncertain if he was born with Panamanian dual citizenship (which, of course, would completely disqualify him).

  16. Wow Robert, I’m blown away for your effort and I am requesting all readers to send a letter to
    Justice Roberts (in support of your effort here). You did some great home-work and thanks for supplying Roberts mailing address in the letter above.

  17. Terrific job, Robert Laity! The cowardly and conspiratorial associate justices and especially the chief justice on our U. S. Supreme Court ought to be removed from their offices. Why? Because they CONTINUE TO IGNORE THE MOST IMPORTANT AND CONSTITUTIONALLY RELEVANT ISSUE OF OUR LIFETIME (IF NOT EVER IN OUR COUNTRY’S HISTORY), i.e. THE DEFINITION OF “NATURAL BORN AMERICAN CITIZEN” AS IT RELATES TO QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE PRESIDENCY. I MIGHT ADD, MR LAITY, THAT YOUR BOOK, “IMPOSTERS IN THE OVAL OFFICE,” IS A MUST READ. One of the most on point and national security relevant writings I have ever read. I say GET RID OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT! THEY’RE NOT DOING THE JOBS THAT THEY WERE APPOINTED TO DO! Who is running this country, anyway? I thought it was supposed to be WE, THE PEOPLE! Tom Arnold.

  18. I am going to keep pursuing closure on this issue of grave national security import until such time as the U.S. Supreme Court stops “Evading the issue” as Associate Justice Clarence Thomas previously claimed in a Congressional hearing in a comment made to then House Appropriations sub-committee Chairman Rep.Jose Serrano, D-NY in 2010. https://www.wnd.com/2010/04/142101/