Posted on 02/12/2010 12:35:44 PM PST by syc1959
Being born in the United States does not even make one a 'NATIVE' citizen.
Immigration and Citizenship: Process and Policy fourth edition Under Jus Soli, the following is written "The Supreme Court's first holding on the sublect suggested that the court would give a restrictive reading to the phrase, potentially disqualifing significant number of persons born within the physical boundries of the nation. In Elk v. Wilkins 112 U.S. 94, 5 S.CT. 41, 28 L.ED. 643 (1884), the court ruled that native Indians were not U.S. citizens, even if they later severed their ties with their tribes. The words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," the court held, mean "not merely subjct in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiange." Most Indians could not meet the test. "Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of, and owing immediate allegiance to, one of the Indian Tribes, (an alien through dependent power,) although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more 'born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,'*** then the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government ***. Id. at 102. It continues that Congress eventually passed legislation with the 'Allotment Act of 1887, that conferred citizenship on many Indians.
The fact remains, the Court held, complete and sole Jurisdiction. As I have held that being born anywhere in the United States, jurisdiction is required, sole and complete, and Barack Hussein Obama was already claimed by British jurisdiction under the British Nationailty Act of 1948, and as such fails the United states Constitutional requirement of a Natural Born Citizen.
When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdoms dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.s children.
Barack Hussein Obama did not have sole jurisdiction under the United States.
Title 8 and the 14th Amendment clearlt state the following;
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof
Note: 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof'
“As a lawyer, Obama knows better than to even claim to be a Natural Born Citizen, He has always referred to himself as a Native Born citizen.”
Apparently, the Hawaii Attorney General’s office won’t even put their stamp of approval on that!
Hawaii Attorney Generals office refuses to corroborate Obamas Hawaii Birth:
STE=Q
What, is the difference between a Citizen and a Natural Born Citizen?
wiggieFool
“No person except a natural born Citizen
[natural-born citizens who are or shall be born of parents]
or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,
[Barack Hussein Obama claims to be born in 1961, that is a far cry from being a citizen when the United States Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787]
shall be eligible to the Office of President;
neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
So Barack Hussein Obama does not have US Citizen parents does he?
Nor was he a citizen on September 17, 1787, was he?
Therefor Barack Hussein Obama, the muslim, the illegal undocumented alien is not qualified, per your understanding
Richard Nixon is proof the office doesn’t allow Plumbers.
I have already proven that a Natural Born Citizen is the child of US Citizen Parents (plural) according to the laws written by the very first Congress and our founding Fathers.
As you put it then it follows by “an act of omission” if that law allows anyone Born to US citizen Parents (plural) to be exclusively Natural Born Citizens by law no matter where they are born even beyond the seas, then by an act omission, (Again) all those born within our borders to US citizen parents (plural again) are indeed Natural Born Citizens and the only type of American Citizens that can be eligible for the presidency.
This is by far the best thread on this subject I have ever been involved with, I have it bookmarked and will no doubt be using it for future reference for a long time.
You guys did an awesome job!
Good idea!
This thread is a college course!
Just one of the many blessings available at FreeRepublic.com ... very well educated and articulate members willing to share their knowledge and wisdom.
And another aspect are the amusing dolts like this one ... good for a few laughs.
This graphic should help. As you see, the natural born citizen is inside the big circle that encompasses all US citizens. So an NBC is still a citizen but not all citizens are NBC.
giggleyPuff [wiggieFool]
Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS - Oral Argument
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, suppose Congress accepts your argument or we accept your argument and say plenary power, they can do whatever they damn please, so they say children born abroad of fathers who are U.S. citizens can become U.S. citizens, but not children who are born abroad of U.S. citizen mothers where the father is an alien.
Now, again was Barack Hussein Obama’s daddy a US Citizen or a?
and futher on.
Justice Ginsburg: Suppose Congress wants to restore the way it was, the way it was for most of our Nation’s history, that the father’s citizenship gets transferred to the child, not the mother’s?
So even with possible citizenship from Stanley Ann, based ONLY if BHO was actually born in Hawaii, claimed but never proven. His British citizenship is sttill confired by his foreign father and that is a dual national and not free from any foreign influence and intrique. That is ‘Native’ status only and never can be a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ which requires being born in the United states to Parents who are citizens.
Yes there is symmetry but they have entire different meanings.
Just like pasture and pasteurized.
Ergo a naturalized citizen cannot be a Natual Born Citizen.
For the purposes of defining what the difference the Founding Fathers had in mind for POTUS, why did they use two wholly different terms, both with different meanings.
I've fastend myself to the floor so I can't be spun in circles :)
Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS - Oral Argument
Justice Ginsburg: Mr. Kneedler, if Congress went back to the way it when was everything was determined by the fathers citizenship, go back before 1934, suppose Congress accepts your argument or we accept your argument and say plenary power, they can do whatever they damn please, so they say children born abroad of fathers who are U.S. citizens can become U.S. citizens, but not children who are born abroad of U.S. citizen mothers where the father is an alien.
Now, again was Barack Hussein Obamas daddy a US Citizen or a?
and futher on.
Justice Ginsburg: Suppose Congress wants to restore the way it was, the way it was for most of our Nations history, that the fathers citizenship gets transferred to the child, not the mothers?
So even with possible citizenship from Stanley Ann, based ONLY if BHO was actually born in Hawaii, claimed but never proven. His British citizenship is sttill confired by his foreign father and that is a dual national and not free from any foreign influence and intrique. That is Native status only and never can be a Natural Born Citizen which requires being born in the United states to Parents who are citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.