Obama's Birth Certificate (View from a natural born Hawaiian - includes copy of mine)

Experimentum Crucis ^

[kabar]

Thanks for taking the time to look it up. In addition to Jus Sanguinis, the US is still one of about 33 countries in the world that uses jus soli, which defines citizenship regardless of who the parents are and what their status is [except for diplomats], as long as they are born on US soil.

If Obama was born overseas in Kenya to an American mother and a Kenyan father, there could be a legal claim that he is not a natural born citizen despite US Code, i.e., it would have to be challenged in the courts.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code, Section 1401, defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth":

Anyone born inside the United States

Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe

Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.

Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national

Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year

Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21

Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)

A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born.

We agree, the law suit is without merit. Obama is natural born even if born in Kenya.

[DCBurgess58]

Okay, we agree on the birth issue, now let's move onto "did he lose his citizenship when he was adopted by an Indonesian man and given Indonesian citizenship".

If he was legally adopted (there is no doubt about that) and if he was in fact naturalized in Indonesia (that needs to be proven, it could be that his step-father lied on school forms to get him enrolled), then he did in fact lose his U.S. citizenship (since the U.S. did not recognise dual citizenship until the Clinton administration). That means he would have had to return to the U.S. as a resident alien and go through the naturalization process (which he didn't do) and thereby would be inelligible to run for President

In order to prove this theory, actual documentation showing that he was given Indonesian citizenship would have to be produced (a school registration form does not confirm the nauralization process, once again his step-father could have lied to the school).

Unless Indonesian naturalzation documents are produced, Obama is a natural-born citizen under U.S. code and entitled to run for President.

If Indonesian naturalzation documents are produced, then Obama did lose his citizenship, is an illegal alien (because he didn't go through the naturalization process, and is not entitled to run for President.

Pretty simple really, produce the documentation or move onto other issues of why he should not be elected President (there are many of those).

We need to deal in facts here folks, fight battles that can be won. The search for Indonesian naturalization documents related to Barak Obama is a worthwhile pursuit, and if found would end Obama's election hopes. Just wishing it were true however, is a waste of time. To quote my father: "wish in one hand and sh!t in the other and see which hand fills up first"

[kabar]

Okay, we agree on the birth issue, now let's move onto "did he lose his citizenship when he was adopted by an Indonesian man and given Indonesian citizenship".

No. He was minor. Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.

If he was legally adopted (there is no doubt about that) and if he was in fact naturalized in Indonesia (that needs to be proven, it could be that his step-father lied on school forms to get him enrolled), then he did in fact lose his U.S. citizenship (since the U.S. did not recognise dual citizenship until the Clinton administration). That means he would have had to return to the U.S. as a resident alien and go through the naturalization process (which he didn't do) and thereby would be inelligible to run for President

See my response above. Since he was a minor, his citizenship cannot be taken away by his parents. I seriously doubt he returned to Hawaii at age 10 on other than an American passport, the same passport he went there on.

In order to prove this theory, actual documentation showing that he was given Indonesian citizenship would have to be produced (a school registration form does not confirm the nauralization process, once again his step-father could have lied to the school).

It wouldn't matter whether he was made an Indonesian citizen or not. He was a minor and couldn't renounce his American citizenship.

Here is a State Department link covering various citizenship issues

[DCBurgess58]

Well, there you have it, time to move on. Altough, this information should be presented to the main body of FReepers, so all are enlightened and can move on to more fruitful issues.

[DCBurgess58]

"Now even more complications are here at play, if he, at the age of 20, traveled to Pakistan (which was prohibited by a U.S. citizen?) on his INDONESIAN Passport!!!"

Do you have a source for the claim that Barak Obama had an Indonesian passport at age 20?

[backpacker_c]

in regards to your post about what is the definition of a natural citizen, the definitions given on page 1 by the state department are correct, in the 1960’s, the u.s. parent must have been in a U.S. territory/possession for 10 years, at least 5 after the age of 14.

click on the notes section of your link at the cornell site, and look for the 1986 amendment.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401——000-notes.html

1986—Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 99–653 substituted “five years, at least two” for “ten years, at least five”.

so, if obama was born outside of a U.S. territory/possession, he does not qualify as a natural citizen.

[DCBurgess58]

1986—Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 99–653 substituted “five years, at least two” for “ten years, at least five”.

"so, if obama was born outside of a U.S. territory/possession, he does not qualify as a natural citizen"

Sorry to inform you of it, but you are incorrect. The change does not affect persons born before the change was made.

If you will re-read a little more closely the link you sent to me, you will see this:

Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Section 23(d) of Pub. L. 99–653, as added by Pub. L. 100–525, § 8(r), Oct. 24, 1988, 102 Stat. 2619, provided that: “The amendment made by section 12 [amending this section] shall apply to persons born on or after November 14, 1986.”

Believe me, I don't want to see Obama made President either, but "this dog just ain't gonna hunt". Instead of filling fellow FReepers with false hope, we should be using our time in more productive ways. Like volunteering at a McCain/Palin phone bank... etc... etc...

[DCBurgess58]

I see what is not making sense to you, you are miss-reading what the 1986 amendment to 1401 did.

1986—Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 99–653 substituted “five years, at least two” for “ten years, at least five”.

The statement is written using legal terminology and in this case the word "substituted" means removed and "for" means added.

What that means is that "five years, at least two" (the time period specified in the 1952 amendment) was removed from the rule and replaced with "ten years, at least five" (the current law)

Once again, the effective date of the 1986 amendment means it does not affect persons born before the change was made.

Sorry to burst your bubble : (

[backpacker_c]

emmmm... the current code was changed to the 5 years, at least 2 years, from what it was previously, which was 10 years, atleast 5. this change (the 5 and 2 year requirements) would affect those born on or after the effective date of Nov 14, 1986.

again, see the link provided by rightwingconspiritor on post 37 of this thread, then reread the way the change is stated.

[backpacker_c]

sorry, i meant to add this also

the note on the substitution was written kind of poorly, and i didn’t mean to sound harsh or anything....

[DCBurgess58]

HANG ON A SECOND, YOU ARE RIGHT!!!! When I was looking at the 1952 law, it linked me to the current law, showing the current legal date, for Obama's mama the age WAS 19!!!!

WHOOT!!!!

[DCBurgess58]

WE WERE WRONG!!!! If Obama was born in Kenya, he is NOT entitled to be President!

The link we were looking at is current law, not the 1952 law! check it out, it even has a link stating that it is current law. So the current standard is 5 years and 2 over age 14.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401----000-.html

The 1986 amendment DID change the time period from 10 years and 5 years over age 14. It also specifies in the effective date portion that the change only affects persons born after the 1986 change! born after 1986, 5 and 2, born before that 10 and 5!!!

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401——000-notes.html

[kabar]

Interesting. That does put a different spin on things. If Obama was born in Kenya, the question I would ask is how did she get Obama back into the US and what did she use to get him a passport once he was back in Hawaii.

I should have picked this up for the DOS website: Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.

It is interesting that if she claimed the child was born out of wedlock, she could pass on citizenship more easily unless this law was changed after 1961. "Birth Abroad Out-of-Wedlock to a U.S. Citizen Mother: A child born abroad out-of-wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother may acquire U.S. citizenship under Section 301(g) INA, as made applicable by Section 309(c) INA if the mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of the child's birth, and if the mother had previously been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year."

So, the Berg suit may have some relevance, which is more the reason why this must be resolved before the election. If Obama is elected, it could set off riots if he were denied the office on a technicality he had no control over and he could plead ignorance about.

[DCBurgess58]

Ok, you're ex-department of state, how do we find out passport rules for infants and then backtrack the changes made since 1961?

any ideas?

[kabar]

Here are the current rules.

When my daughter was born overseas in 1975, we registered her birth at the US consulate and she was added to my wife's passport. We were both US citizens [wife naturalized] and we had diplomatic passports. Obama's case would be different, hence my question as to how he could be registered since his mother could not convey directly citizenship under the laws existing at the time, unless she claimed she was not married.

She could have brought the child home legally some other way. I just don't know how at this pointg without researching it further. Perhaps she could still get a Counslar Report of Birth and then go through the citizenship process once she returned to Hawaii. That could explain why there is only a birth certificate from Hawaii and not a live certificate of birth.

All of this is speculation. I find it odd that she would go to Kenya to have the child when her husband was still attending school in the US. I guess the fact that Obama Sr. had a current student visa and his wife a US passport, it could be possible that they could bring in the child without being a US citizen as long as they had evidence that the child was theirs.

I will have to think about it for a bit and do some research.

[DCBurgess58]

The most interesting bit to me here is that Obama's Kenyan grandmother said that she was in the delivery room when he was born. If that is true, how would you have gotten a newborn from Kenya through immigration in the U.S.in 1961? Would a copy of the marriage license and a Kenyan birth certificate have sufficed?

The document that Obama's people on the "fight the smears" website say is his birth certificate is a modern document, not a copy of his 1961 birth certificate. It just says it is a certificate of live birth, showing the place of birth as Oahu. Might she have brought him back and "backfilled" the U.S. citizenship by declaring that he was born at home?

If Obama could produce a birth certificate that shows what hospital he was born at, the issue would go away, but he doesn't. I was born in 1958 and my birth certificate says what hospital I was born at.

[kabar]

Would a copy of the marriage license and a Kenyan birth certificate have sufficed?

I would presume so. The mother had a US passport and the father a Kenyan passport with a valid student visa. I would presume that Obama Jr. could be brought in on that basis. Either the baby was issued a Kenyan passport or put on the father's passport. The mother could then claim that Obama was born in the US at home or get him naturalized using the report of birth registration at the consulate. The fact that there is a contemperaneous birth announcement in a Hawaii paper suggests the former.

It still seems a bit of a stretch.

[DCBurgess58]

The fact that there is a contemperaneous birth announcement in a Hawaii paper suggests the former.

You got a source on that, I'd be interested to see it.

BTW I've been doing some research on birth certificates. according to wikipedia, there are 2 type, long form and short form.

Long form is an actual photocopy of the original birth certificate, including the hospital and attending physician, parents addresses... etc ... etc. It is available if Barak Obama wanted a copy of it.

Short form is a copy that has almost no detail at. That is what "Fight the smears" has posted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_certificates

[DCBurgess58]

It still seems a bit of a stretch.

Well his grandma said she was there, plus there were some hospital workers (supposedly) who said they were there as well. One hospital worker, once again (supposedly), said that Barak's mother was not allowed to fly back to the U.S. because she was too close to delivery.

Any way to check customs records to track the mother's dates out of and in to the country?

[kabar]

Here is the newspaper announcement