Replies

Since Hawaii was a US territory in 1959, his citizenship would still not be in question.

If he were born prior to Hawaii statehood, then his mother's eligibility to pass along citizenship is called into question.

From FindLaw.com: "If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16." Obama's mother would not meet this standard.

Now, I'm not expecting anything to result from these questions that would disqualify Obama. However, we had better be willing to ask these questions NOW, and have precedents for handling these questions settled NOW, instead of waiting a few more years until we start to have clearly illegitimate candidates trying to get elected.

Eh, I spoke too quickly:

Hawaii:

A person born in Hawaii on or after August 12, 1898, and before April 30, 1900, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900. A person born in Hawaii on or after April 30, 1900, is a citizen of the United States at birth. A person who was a citizen of the Republic of Hawaii on August 12, 1898, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900.

So, never mind...

From FindLaw.com: “If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.” Obama’s mother would not meet this standard.

But have 2 non-citizen parents and be born here and bingo you’re a citizen, what’s wrong with this picture?