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'

[EnderWiggins]

"Your whole argument rests on the singular idea that you can be a dual citizen and be president of the united States."

Actually... no.

My whole argument rests on the fact that Obama meets the definition of natural born citizen. The Constitution tells us what the President must be, not what he otherwise cannot be.

And no proscription exists or has ever existed in the Constitution against a dual citizen from being President.

"Nope, you can’t. This is EVERYTHING the founders wanted to prevent."

And yet after two years no Birther can show a single example of a single founder who ever said so. So forgive me for not taking your word for it a quarter millennium later.

"A Natural Born Citizen holds ONLY the citizenship of the United States. A Native Born Citizen was born here, but may have an alien parent. The two are NOT the same and never have been."

No. A natural born citizen is anyone born on American soil who is not the child of a foreign diplomat or occupying army. There is no difference between native born and natural born other than that the Constitution uses one term and not the other.

"I feel completely free to ignore literally every thing you post in the future now. You have nothing of any value or content to say."

You've always been free to ignore me. And yet, here you are again.

[EnderWiggins]

"It’s hard to figure whether you’re faulting the Founders because they didn’t have a time machine so they would know about the coming of your affirmative action fraud-in-chief, or you’re denying the Constitution cites being a natural born citizen as a requirement for legitimate holding of the office of President ... hence the reason some of us use ‘pres_ _ent when referring to the office your Barry holds."

Those are not the only options.

[EnderWiggins]

Know the letter. Love the letter.

How do imagine it helps you even the tiniest bit?

[syc1959]

wiggie fool - english must be your second language cause stupidity seems to be your first

[Danae]

Yep. People like EW don’t seem to get that the constitution doesn’t say that a Dual Citizen can be POTUS. It says you have to be a Natural Born Citizen born under the jurisdiction of the United States. If Obama was born with his status governed by that of another Nation, then he is not born under the jurisdiction of the United States, he is born under the Jurisdiction of Great Britain. Hawaii MAY be the place of his birth, but it is not his country. His country is Britain.

[EnderWiggins]

You keep saying the same exact thing. I know computer programs that are more creative that that.

[syc1959]

glad you can read, but no denial about your shortcomings.

[EnderWiggins]

"If Obama was born with his status governed by that of another Nation, then he is not born under the jurisdiction of the United States, he is born under the Jurisdiction of Great Britain."

Too bad the US Supreme Court has called BS on that interpretation.

"The real object of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in qualifying the words, "All persons born in the United States" by the addition "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," would appear to have been to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words (besides children of members of the Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National Government, unknown to the common law), the two classes of cases -- children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State -- both of which, as has already been shown, by the law of England and by our own law from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in America, had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the country."

[syc1959]

wiggieFool

Too bad the US Supreme Court has called BS on that interpretation -

WRONG. Considering that Obama himself states that he was under British law and maintains that till this every day. Which is direct conflict with having to be under the sole and complete United States jurisdiction to be under the jurisdiction of the united states, no partial or degree thereof is suffient.

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.

Title 8 and the 14th Amendment both state; All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

So explain how “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.”

So to ‘what’ degree was Barack Hussein Obama under US Jurisdiction at birth? Knowing that he was already under British jurisdiction, and how that being only partial or to whatever degree you impose not being in conflict with “completely subject to”?

Mind you this is The Supreme Court that has stated complete and not partial to any degree jurisdiction.

[usmcobra]

Prove they didn’t.....

What do you think the Natural Born Clause is all about?

What was their purpose in making it part of the constitutional requirements of the eligibility of the Presidency?

[Danae]

More bs from EW.

YEA.

[EnderWiggins]

Answering the question for the dozenth or so time: "So explain how “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."

This is how (in the Supreme Court's own words):

"The real object of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in qualifying the words, "All persons born in the United States" by the addition "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," would appear to have been to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words (besides children of members of the Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National Government, unknown to the common law), the two classes of cases -- children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State -- both of which, as has already been shown, by the law of England and by our own law from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in America, had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the country."

[EnderWiggins]

"What do you think the Natural Born Clause is all about?"

To prevent as mush as possible a foreigner becoming President of the United States. Just like John Jay said.

[EnderWiggins]

“much” not “mush”

[syc1959]

so with ZERO precent allowable for complete jurisdiction, with a foreign father, under foreign law...

how much would you say Obama is under foreign anything?

Since there is NO evidence that Barack Hussein Obama was actually born in Hawii, only claims, and NONE of his claims has ever been proven to be factual, just like his ‘goat herder father’

[usmcobra]

If John Jay said it was to prevent a Foreigner from becoming President, than isn’t a admitted British Subject and Kenyan Citizen a foreigner?

[EnderWiggins]

Absolutely not.

A foreigner is someone who is not a citizen.

A dual citizen is therefore certainly not a foreigner.

[Danae]

According to Eggie, you can be a foreigner and a natural born citizen at the same time.

Eggie is full of bs.

[BP2]

> “much” not “mush”

no, you were on target with it being mush

first thing you’ve said correctly all day

[EnderWiggins]

Oh... I’m far more than that, Danae. I am myself a natural born citizen and a dual citizen at the same time.

Go figure!!!

You might be too.