Kerchner v. Obama Appeal to the Third Circuit to Be Decided on the Briefs with No Oral Argument

puzo1.blogspot.com ^ | 6/15/2010 | Mario Apuzzo, Esq

[patlin]

very good find there. another interesting bit of historical evidence as I again listen to the Tuan Anh Nguyen oral arguments comes from none other than Justice Ginsburg:

Justice Ginsburg: Mr. Kneedler, if Congress went back to the way it when was everything was determined by the father's citizenship, go back before 1934

Note that Ginsburg calls it the bad old days aka before feminism, but the rule did not change as to the birth status of a child born in wedlock and historical research of state laws is proof of that. Not until after the 1965 INS Act & then the subsequent opening of citizenship to Vietnamese & Korean children born to US soldiers to give them refuge from an oppressive regime, did the citizenship waters get all muddied up. IT WAS THE BEGINNING OF THE DUMBING DOWN OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP PER SAUL ALINSKY & THE COMMUNIST PARTY USA AS WELL AS THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA INWHICH BARACK MILLHOUSE HUSSEIN OBAMA WAS A CARD CARRYING MEMBER!

Now the question begs to be answered. Did the Congress by passing the Act in 1934 which allowed women to hold seperate citizenship from the husband completely change the Constitutional definition of NBC as it pertains to A2S1C5?

[El Gato]

Scalia is recognizing the fact that under the US Constitution & US codified law, the the US, there is no law allowing for dual citizenship. This would apply whether born in the US or abroad.

There is also no law prohibiting it.

However in this case their is a law that says that certain people are citizens at birth. So he's wrong when he says that the person was not a citizen until proven to be one. He was a citizen at birth, under the statutes, but that status just was not recognized. Semantics, maybe, but I think not quite.

[patlin]

Another interesting find pertaining to children born in wedlock. If the child born in wedlock automatically gains the citizenship of the mother then why did the government say this:

(b) United States born child of citizen mother and alien diplomat farther eligible . A child born in the United States of a citizen mother and an alien father what was a foreign diplomatic official accredited to the United States was deemed to have been born outside the United States for the purpose of naturalization under the above 1940 provisions.

according to the government, in 1940 citizenship was still derived primarily form the father unless born out of wedlock. This is in compliance with International law of the time.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45077/0-0-0-48278.html