Replies

I think the saddest thing about the Obama eligibility issue is that courts have been dodging making a clear pronouncement on whether “natural born citizen” should be understood in light of Vattel’s notion of “native” (born in country to two citizen parents) as in Minor v. Happersett, or in light of the English common law notion of “natural subject” (subject, or citizen in our case, at the time of birth) as in U.S. v Wong Kim Ark.

Obviously, regardless of where he was born, Obama would be ineligible to be President if the Vattel notion applies.

“Birtherism”, the position that Obama was born in Kenya (a notion that seems to have originated with Obama himself, or at least with his first literary publicist) is only relevant if the common law notion applies.

If, however, Obama was born in Kenya (or rather British East Africa), and his father was, in fact, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., not as some have claimed Frank Marshall Davis, then he not only is not a natural born citizen under either standard, but unless he was secretly naturalized, he is not even a citizen of the United States, since the prevailing law at the time would not have allowed a parent under the age of 21 to transmit citizenship to a child born outside the U.S. when the other parent was a foreign national. (The specification for transmission of citizenship being the parent be resident in the U.S. for ten years, five of which were after the age of 16. Ann Dunham was 18 at the time of Obama’s birth.) Obama would be a British subject, or could have claimed Kenyan citizenship upon Kenyan independence, and/or a citizen of Indonesia based on his mother and step-father’s application on his behalf, but would not a U.S. citizen at all, were he, in fact born in British East Africa.

“If, however, Obama was born in Kenya (or rather British East Africa), and his father was, in fact, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., .....unless he was secretly naturalized, he is not even a citizen of the United States,...”

Correctomundo! Stop right here. The rest of what you say is unnecessary and will only confuse others as it did me.

If Obama is not a “Natural Born” citizen of the United States ........ Then WHO CARES what country he IS a citizen of?

I believe VERY STRONGLY that Obama is an ILLEGAL ALIEN (or just an alien from another planet. He may have been HATCHED). I digress.

There has been many a Masters and Doctoral thesis written on this. British common law dealt with subjects, property of a state and their relationship with that states monarch or king/queen. The US constitution deals with the relationship between free men without any King who we where throwing under a bus at gun point at that time. The only commonality of British common law and US law is both are written in English. The founding fathers pointedly did not use British common law in writing the Constitution.

If, however, Obama was born in Kenya (or rather British East Africa), and his father was, in fact, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., not as some have claimed Frank Marshall Davis, then he not only is not a natural born citizen under either standard, but unless he was secretly naturalized, he is not even a citizen of the United States, since the prevailing law at the time would not have allowed a parent under the age of 21 to transmit citizenship to a child born outside the U.S. when the other parent was a foreign national. (The specification for transmission of citizenship being the parent be resident in the U.S. for ten years, five of which were after the age of 16. Ann Dunham was 18 at the time of Obama’s birth.) Obama would be a British subject, or could have claimed Kenyan citizenship upon Kenyan independence, and/or a citizen of Indonesia based on his mother and step-father’s application on his behalf, but would not a U.S. citizen at all, were he, in fact born in British East Africa.

BO was a state representative in IL and a U.S. Senator from IL. Both offices require U.S. citizenship. How was BO able to prove eligibility for these offices (if indeed he did at all)?

Constitution of the State of Illinois: Article IV - The Legislature

http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con4.htm

SECTION 2. LEGISLATIVE COMPOSITION
(a) One Senator shall be elected from each Legislative District. Immediately following each decennial redistricting, the General Assembly by law shall divide the Legislative Districts as equally as possible into three groups. Senators from one group shall be elected for terms of four years, four years and two years; Senators from the second group, for terms of four years, two years and four years; and Senators from the third group, for terms of two years, four years and four years. The Legislative Districts in each group shall be distributed substantially equally over the State.
[...]
(c) To be eligible to serve as a member of the General Assembly, a person must be a United States citizen, at least 21 years old, and for the two years preceding his election or appointment a resident of the district which he is to represent. In the general election following a redistricting, a candidate for the General Assembly may be elected from any district which contains a part of the district in which he resided at the time of the redistricting and reelected if a resident of the new district he represents for 18 months prior to reelection.

United States Constitution

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

Article. I.

[…]

Section. 3.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

[…]

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

(Emphasis added.)