Replies

Nothing in your posting of Dicey contradicts what I wrote. In fact it repeatedly recognizes that under British common law, "a person born beyond the limits of the British dominions does not at his birth owe allegiance to the Crown" and makes no effort to contradict that.

Even though later legislation allows for certain persons born outside of the UK to be "natural-born subjects themselves, to all intents and purposes," it continues to explicitly acknowledge that their birth has occurred outside allegiance to the crown. It makes no pretense and offers no implication that a child so born is at birth under the Crown's protection, and so no reciprocal allegiance is merited.

Therefore my comment stands without contradiction:

"And that allegiance is determined at birth by whatever nation is providing the protection for which natural allegiance is owed. If born on US soil, that protection is afforded exclusively and solely by the US. Hence, that child is a natural born American citizen."

“Professor Morse, in a ground-breaking article on the issue, defined the natural born citizen as: “One whose citizen-ship is established by the jurisdiction of which the United States already has over the parents of the child, not what is thereafter acqired by choice of residencein this country.”

The Founders were recognizing “the law of hereditary, rather than territorial allegiance.” In other words, they were drawing on the English legal tradition, which protected allegiance to the king by conferring citizenship on all children “whose fathers were natural-born subjects,” regardless of where the children were born.

What is the jurisdiction of Barack Hussein Obama Sr, British. That jurisdiction, transended to his children, by no act of their own, but their birth.

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s 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.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

By his own admission, and you are calling Barack Hussein Obama a liar?

You are nothing but a liar who cannot accept the fact that you are wrong.

Here is the link for the digital copy of Dicey's book for all to see:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Gz0yAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=digest+of+the+law+of+england+dicey&source=bl&ots=DVXRWTsEzi&sig=Y755-yMwEW7h8iV5vfUYXV6-n_I&hl=en&ei=_Jp9S6eUKtXSlAeHr8jTBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Punch in page 168 in the window above the cover. Pages 168-170 contain the relevent information about children born abroad being natural born subjects.

And, since you are SO enamored with the Ark decision, here is what Ark said:

" ... By the statute of 7 Anne (1708) c. 5, 3, 'the children of all natural-born subjects, born out of the ligeance of her majesty, her heirs and successors,'-explained by the statute of 4 Geo. II. (1731) c. 21, to mean all children born out of the ligeance of the crown of England, 'whose fathers were or shall be natural-born subjects of the crown of England, or of Great Britain, at the time of the birth of such children respectively,'-'shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be natural-born subjects of this kingdom, to all intents, constructions and purposes whatsoever."