Being born in the United States does not even make one a 'NATIVE' citizen.

nobarack08 | Feb 12, 2010 | syc1959

[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 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.

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'

[Red Steel]

Why is it that Franklin had a copy and made sure that another made it to the University of Virgina (Forgive me here, I am going from memory...

Refreshing the mem.

[Red Steel]

Do you have any citationsz to support your assertions? Or are they just assertions. If Vattel was not significant, then why is it that during the debates there were passazges from his work read aloud?

He has none.

[EnderWiggins]

Danae,

I again point out the following incontrovertible facts.

1. There was only one definition of "natural born citizen" in the English language at the time the Framers wrote Article II of the US Constitution. That was the definition provided by three centuries of English common law. There was no other.

2. That definition is that anyone born on national soil who was not the child of a foreign diplomat or occupying army was a natural born citizen.

3. More than half of the Framers were lawyers who had practiced under English common law and were familiar with the phrase as a term of art. Its selection was not an accident... it was a well known, well understood and completely unambiguous term. They made no effort to indicate that they were using it in any new, innovative or anomalous way.

4. Not a single Founder or Framer can be shown to have (even once) argued that natural born citizens could not be dual citizens, or that natural born citizens had to have two citizen parents.

5. De Vattel was never once referenced in the Federal Convention's debates regarding eligibility for any office.

6. De Vattel himself never wrote the phrase, and no copy of his book included the phrase until thirty years after he was dead and ten years too late to have influenced Article II or the US Constitution.

7. In 250 years, an English edition has never been published of de Vattel's book that translates "naturels" as "natural born citizen." Every single one that includes the phrase does so as a translation of "indegenes."

8. At least one Framer (James Madison) is on record as saying that the rule in America for citizenship at birth is jus soli. There are exactly none who have said it is jus sanguinis.

9. The only American court that has ever directly and explicitly ruled on the definition of "natural born citizen" in relation to Presidential eligibility was the three judge panel in Indiana last year that wrote:

"Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."

Let me know if you come up with money to make that bet.

[EnderWiggins]

"American law is American law and it is not subject to any other Nations."

Why then do you keep insisting that the UK has the power to tell us who our natural born citizens are and who they are not?

[Las Vegas Ron]

Wow, most excellent find and post!

[Danae]

ROTFLMAO...

Are you being deliberately dense or are you just like this?

UK law has little to do with American law other than this: Barack Obama Jr. BY BRITISH LAW inherited his father’s citizenship at the instant of his birth. Obama himself says he was born subject to British law. It’s on his website!

He was born a dual citizen, and because of that, by definition, he cannot be... never could be, a Natural Born Citizen. He had more than one citizenship at birth. He could today become a full on British citizen, so too could his daughters.

Natural Born Citizen means you have and have only ever had the citizenship of one nation, in the case we are discussing, American Citizenship.

Obama is an Usurper and should be removed from office. His pretense is a crime against the constitution.

[Red Steel]

1. There was only one definition of "natural born citizen" in the English language at the time the Framers wrote Article II of the US Constitution. That was the definition provided by three centuries of English common law. There was no other.

The undeniable facts are that the Founders could read French, and that the Founders used Vattel's definition as the meaning and intent for Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, the Natural Born Citizen clause, in the US Constitution.

We see below that it does say 'Natural' in French highlighted. It's no denying it - there it is:

[Danae]

"incontrovertible

Only in your mind. Here is an example from today that blows your argument right straight to where it belongs. Please note, just because you believe something does not make it correct, in this case not only are you incorrect, you are way off. This is an example from today. Try to recognize that this concept was not developed in 1941, or 48, or even 1888. Its been around a LOT longer than that:

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html

Dual Nationality

The concept of dual nationality means that a person is a citizen of two countries at the same time. Each country has its own citizenship laws based on its own policy.Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice. For example, a child born in a foreign country to U.S. citizen parents may be both a U.S. citizen and a citizen of the country of birth.

A U.S. citizen may acquire foreign citizenship by marriage, or a person naturalized as a U.S. citizen may not lose the citizenship of the country of birth.U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another. Also, a person who is automatically granted another citizenship does not risk losing U.S. citizenship. However, a person who acquires a foreign citizenship by applying for it may lose U.S. citizenship. In order to lose U.S. citizenship, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign citizenship voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. citizenship.

Intent can be shown by the person's statements or conduct.The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance.

However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there.Most U.S. citizens, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States. Dual nationals may also be required by the foreign country to use its passport to enter and leave that country. Use of the foreign passport does not endanger U.S. citizenship.Most countries permit a person to renounce or otherwise lose citizenship.

Information on losing foreign citizenship can be obtained from the foreign country's embassy and consulates in the United States. Americans can renounce U.S. citizenship in the proper form at U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.

[EnderWiggins]

"The undeniable facts are that the Founders could read French, and that the Founders used Vattel's definition as the meaning and intent for Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, the Natural Born Citizen clause, in the US Constitution."

This is a lie. De Vattel never once ever defined "natural born citizen. The phrase never once passed through his lips or his pen.

[Danae]

OMG! You mean Ben Franklin lived in Paris for years AND he could read FRENCH! zOMG NO WAI!

ROTFLMAO.

That guy is a nutcase.

[Red Steel]

This is a lie. De Vattel never once ever defined "natural born citizen. The phrase never once passed through his lips or his pen.

If anyone is lying here it's you.

[Danae]

ROFL

There it is in print son.

Just because you can’t read french doesn’t mean that others can’t.

Vattel did indeed specifically define Natural Born Citizen. The phrase didn’t just show up out of nowhere to confuse people 3 hundred years later for your convenience.

[EnderWiggins]

"UK law has little to do with American law other than this: Barack Obama Jr. BY BRITISH LAW inherited his father’s citizenship at the instant of his birth. Obama himself says he was born subject to British law. It’s on his website!"

Go back and read his website. It says no such thing. It says his status as a British subject was governed by British law. Not him.

And why you imagine for a second he is actually the guy posting stuff to his website is just... well, weird.

"He was born a dual citizen, and because of that, by definition, he cannot be... never could be, a Natural Born Citizen. He had more than one citizenship at birth. He could today become a full on British citizen, so too could his daughters."

There you go again, making up fake definitions. Until you finally get around to showing us where a single framer ever said even once that NBCs could not be dual citizens, you are merely blowing smoke.

"Natural Born Citizen means you have and have only ever had the citizenship of one nation, in the case we are discussing, American Citizenship."

Sadly.... no. It doesn't. It never has.

There are tens of millions of natural born American citizens who are dual citizens and don;t even know it. Maybe even you.

[little jeremiah]

He’s like the Unman in C.S.Lewis’ book “Perelandra”. A sort of zombie-like fiend character who repeats the same horrid nonsense over and over and over and over (etc) again, no matter how many times his nonsense is defeated.

Finally the hero just killed the Unman.

(Zot?)

He’s obviously a hireling and must be getting a bit frustrated by having his “arguments” destroyed over and over and over (etc) again.

[Danae]

And an apparent fan of Orson Scott Card. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ender_Wiggin

[EnderWiggins]

The phrase “natural born citizen” is not there. Not in English, not in French, not in Slovenian.

[Red Steel]

Heeehee. ;-)

[Non-Sequitur]

The question has been asked anyway.

And has the British government come up with an answer?

[EnderWiggins]

There is nothing in that discussion that even hints that a natural born American citizen cannot be a dual citizen at the same time.

Nice try, no cigar.

[Red Steel]

Indeed. That makes sense... and him trying to pass off his fictional world view.