80.3 F
Charlotte Amalie
Wednesday, May 18, 2022
HomeNewsArchivesBallentine Defends Suit, Responds to Hoffman

Ballentine Defends Suit, Responds to Hoffman

Dear Source,
I have read your electronic news quite often as it always appears that you have current objective versions of the happenings in our community. A recent edition published three articles, dated Dec. 30, 2005; March 21, 2002 and March 17, 2002 with a letter to the editor undated by a Robert Hoffman entitled Ballentine is wrong about Constitution.
The article dated March 17, 2002 is the only article reported correctly: "Lawsuit seeks full rights for Virgin Islanders" (citizens of the United States).
The article entitled "Appeals Court May Hear V.I. Citizenship Case" is really very speculative as the only thing before the Third Circuit is a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus. In our layman's conversation a Writ of Mandamus, formally served by deputy U. S. Marshals, is an order of a higher court for a lower court or government agency to perform an expected duty. Ergo, the Third Circuit would either order the court or refuse to order or honor the request for the Writ of Mandamus.
The third article dated March 21, 2002 which may be titled properly is misleading because the court did not honor the dismissal and has not ruled to date leaving no adjudication of the case at all with all evidence in.
The letter, undated*, by Mr. Robert Hoffman, "Ballentine is Wrong About Constitution" assumes that he, Mr. Hoffman, knows more about the Constitution than the courts as he is rendering a decision the court found difficult.
Mr. Hoffman's labeling "soi-disant "philosopher" may show an explanation linguistically but does not indicate any expertise in deciding who is or is not a philosopher; and, I am a member emeritus of the American Philosophical Association, Delaware and a long time member of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, London. I have also published and donated copies of a book, Krim's Simplistic Philosophies, Vantage Press, NY, 1988, no longer in print but is a part of the University of the Virgin Islands Caribbean section.
Electoral votes are not given by states but are based on the amount of elected federal officials a state has, senators and representatives. They are appointed or elected by the Governor and or legislature and usually no one knows who they are. The Virgin Islands under the Constitution, not the courts, are authorized one electoral vote based on our one congressman or congressperson elected. The governor should appoint an electoral person and test the law.
The only wrong any court of the United States has made has been in hearing bad arguments and deciding which of the bad arguments most meets the Constitution. The Constitution clearly says that Congress has mandated authority over "naturalization." And, citizenship is explained not only in the Fourteenth Amendment but in the qualifications for the office of the President of the United States: born natural, 35 years of age and resident in the United States 14 years before assuming the office. Voting for the President and congressional representation is by population, senators of the U. S. are by states, formerly selected by the legislature of states. Last, all states of the United States were territories prior to seeking admission and did not require from congress but one thing: to vote on their application for inclusion. No one set in place their status prior to their application. Oh yes, philosophically, it only takes an eighth grader to read and explain what was read in the Constitution of the United States of America.
Krim M. Ballentine
St. Thomas, VI
* Publisher's note: Published Jan. 1, 2006
Editors note:We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Keeping our community informed is our top priority.
If you have a news tip to share, please call or text us at 340-228-8784.




Support local + independent journalism in the U.S. Virgin Islands

Unlike many news organizations, we haven't put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as accessible as we can. Our independent journalism costs time, money and hard work to keep you informed, but we do it because we believe that it matters. We know that informed communities are empowered ones. If you appreciate our reporting and want to help make our future more secure, please consider donating.

STAY CONNECTED

20,771FansLike
4,718FollowersFollow

FROM FACEBOOK

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
Load more
Dear Source,
I have read your electronic news quite often as it always appears that you have current objective versions of the happenings in our community. A recent edition published three articles, dated Dec. 30, 2005; March 21, 2002 and March 17, 2002 with a letter to the editor undated by a Robert Hoffman entitled Ballentine is wrong about Constitution.
The article dated March 17, 2002 is the only article reported correctly: "Lawsuit seeks full rights for Virgin Islanders" (citizens of the United States).
The article entitled "Appeals Court May Hear V.I. Citizenship Case" is really very speculative as the only thing before the Third Circuit is a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus. In our layman's conversation a Writ of Mandamus, formally served by deputy U. S. Marshals, is an order of a higher court for a lower court or government agency to perform an expected duty. Ergo, the Third Circuit would either order the court or refuse to order or honor the request for the Writ of Mandamus.
The third article dated March 21, 2002 which may be titled properly is misleading because the court did not honor the dismissal and has not ruled to date leaving no adjudication of the case at all with all evidence in.
The letter, undated*, by Mr. Robert Hoffman, "Ballentine is Wrong About Constitution" assumes that he, Mr. Hoffman, knows more about the Constitution than the courts as he is rendering a decision the court found difficult.
Mr. Hoffman's labeling "soi-disant "philosopher" may show an explanation linguistically but does not indicate any expertise in deciding who is or is not a philosopher; and, I am a member emeritus of the American Philosophical Association, Delaware and a long time member of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, London. I have also published and donated copies of a book, Krim's Simplistic Philosophies, Vantage Press, NY, 1988, no longer in print but is a part of the University of the Virgin Islands Caribbean section.
Electoral votes are not given by states but are based on the amount of elected federal officials a state has, senators and representatives. They are appointed or elected by the Governor and or legislature and usually no one knows who they are. The Virgin Islands under the Constitution, not the courts, are authorized one electoral vote based on our one congressman or congressperson elected. The governor should appoint an electoral person and test the law.
The only wrong any court of the United States has made has been in hearing bad arguments and deciding which of the bad arguments most meets the Constitution. The Constitution clearly says that Congress has mandated authority over "naturalization." And, citizenship is explained not only in the Fourteenth Amendment but in the qualifications for the office of the President of the United States: born natural, 35 years of age and resident in the United States 14 years before assuming the office. Voting for the President and congressional representation is by population, senators of the U. S. are by states, formerly selected by the legislature of states. Last, all states of the United States were territories prior to seeking admission and did not require from congress but one thing: to vote on their application for inclusion. No one set in place their status prior to their application. Oh yes, philosophically, it only takes an eighth grader to read and explain what was read in the Constitution of the United States of America.
Krim M. Ballentine
St. Thomas, VI
* Publisher's note: Published Jan. 1, 2006
Editors note:We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.