Such a marriage does not create dual citizenship for the children under the BNA of 1948, which appears to have been the concern of the founders.
While the wife may enforce property rights, the UK, after proper discovery in Kenya and HI, would likely decline to consider BHO II to be one of the children of BHO Sr that was actually “governed by the BNA of 1948”, as Obama’s campaign so cleverly dangled before the opposition like a red flag in front of a bull.
Why would Obama’s campaign dangle this UK statute out to the public in a statement obviously drafted by lawyers if they didn't have an back door escape? Note that the campaign only said the BNA of 1948 governed BHO Sr’s children, NOT BHO II specifically.
It was Factcheck, not Obama’s campaign that jumped to put forward the assumption that BHO II specifically was a UK subject at birth. That assumption is based on a non-bigamous marriage, which the 1948 BNA’s governance specifically excludes, but Factcheck didn't examine that issue before they declared BHO II to be a UK subject at birth.
If a bigamous marriage were introduced into evidence, BHO II would not be a UK subject at birth and would not be a dual citizen and no violation of that aspect of the founder's intent. Of course, as yet there has been no SCOTUS ruling on point to Obama’s fact set, so I am only speculating.
Roger Ailes, Rush and Coulter do their homework and may view the NBC issue to be a trap because the bigamy could well negate Obama’s dual citizenship status at birth.
Obama was confident that he could deflect a challenge to his NBC status caused by his UK subject father, and he was right. He gamed the system though distortion and complicity of the MSM, Hillary, McCain and all of the elites, especially in taking advantage of superficial ambiguities in the WKA decision that can be twisted to support a conclusion that Wong was NBC. Obama was inaugurated in spite of a public declaration leading to an assumption that he was a subject of the Queen at birth.
What Obama is obviously NOT confident about is the “born on US soil” aspect of his NBC status.
Regarding the bigamy aspect, from what I’ve read, there is a lot of murkiness surrounding 0bama Sr’s marraige to Kezia, dates of their first son’s birth, when 0 Sr left for the US, whether they had a legal marriage at that time or ever, etc.
Their intent went to foreign influence, not merely dual nationality. I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that BO is not influenced by his father's nationality.
But you may be right about them throwing out that bone, to distract from the real meat.
It shouldn't matter. If BHO Sr is the acknowledged father, then BHO Jr was not born of two citizen parents. OTOH, if Frank Davis or Malcom X or some black sailor was the father.. and the birth certificate reflects that, or doesn't show a father at all, then Junior is an NBC. But unless it shows a name other than Barack Hussien Obama II, that would seem unlikely.
I recall he then paid a "courtesy" visit to John Robers on January 14, 2009, hmmmm!!!