Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: null and void
BTW, see how much trouble two of our resident legal experts are having coming to an agreement of what the actual question is here?

No, don't say that. It's a complex statute which has been renumbered and amended with effective dates that are sometimes inconsistent with application dates in the statute. And I don't think either of us, certainly not me, are I & N legal experts.

The focus is on Sec. 1409(c) which governs illegitimate children born outside the US to a mother who is a US citizen. Much application to Obama seems doubtful because to get him to (c), you have to make him illegitimate and born outside the US. If you get him that far, doubtful he ever gets close to "naturally born".

But I would like to bury this issue conclusively so that we can say exactly what the law is under any given set of facts as they may develop.

2,192 posted on 07/07/2008 4:05:15 PM PDT by David (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2170 | View Replies ]


To: David
Much application to Obama seems doubtful because to get him to (c), you have to make him illegitimate and born outside the US. If you get him that far, doubtful he ever gets close to "naturally born".

One of the theories is he was never married when she gave birth. The law in effect when he was born would make him a citizen no matter where he was born if his mother was unwed. This eliminates one potential theory as having an merit.

Another theory is the dates he was born are wrong and he was born before Hawaii was a state. Section 1405 makes that theory irrelevant.

2,208 posted on 07/07/2008 5:42:06 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2192 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson