Replies

a friend of mine says that if Obama’s mother is a US citizen it doesn’t matter where he was born...is this true?

Nope. IIRC: According to the laws at that time, she was a minor and not able to register him.

No. I think these are the rules;

Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. Natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between “December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986? . Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. Citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal. US Law very clearly stipulates: “…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.”

No, it is not true. One US citizen parent has to meet certain criteria for their children to be born US citizens if they are born outside the US. Bozo's mother didn't meet that criteria. It has been posted on FR many times as to the exact criteria she had to meet. If a person is born of two US citizens then it doesn't matter where you are born, witness McCain, he was born in the Panama Canal zone of two US citizen parents and he is a Natural Born citizen and he had to prove it at the start of the campaign in response to Democrats pushing for it.

Bozo is not a natural born citizen IF he was born outside of the US.

Tell your friend to read the laws concerning this issue.

http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/misc2008/Obama-USA-TODAY-ad.htm

“a friend of mine says that if Obama’s mother is a US citizen it doesn’t matter where he was born...is this true?”

Thats not exactly true - that is just what the Immigration and Naturalization ACT (INA), as amended, currently states.

I do not know if the current statute has ever been tested at SCOTUS.

The Nationality Act of 1940, amended 1952, was law at the time of Obama’s birth - and cases like Obama’s circumstances were tested at SCOTUS.

At the time of his birth, the law required the U.S. citizen (Obama’s mother) to have resided in the United States for ten (10) years prior to his birth - which she did. However, five (5) of those years had to be after the age of fourteen (14) - which she DID NOT.

Obama’s mother was eighteen (18) when she gave birth. If she gave birth in Kenya - Obama is NOT a natural born citizen, a citizen by birth, or a citizen at birth, according to the laws in effect at the time. But, he might automatically be a naturalized citizen at birth - even if he is, he is ineligible to be POTUS.

Now, comes the hard part ... The INA has been amended many times since then.

The amendments usually contained a clause that stated that they DID NOT retroactively apply to previous citizenship status.

Can you imagine if a naturalized citizen (by birth) in 1940 was suddenly a natural born citizen. His children (if naturalized) would be natural born, and their children too.

Any court cases that were decided on the basis of citizenship (deportations, etc.) would have to be reversed ... what a nightmare.

Anyway, that was the justification for non-retroactive application of the INA. It applied GOING FORWARD.

However, in recent years, revisions to the INA HAVE NOT included this non-retroactive clause.

Therefore, per the law on the books at THIS time, Obama might be able to claim natural born citizenship status - even if he was born on the moon.

The current law states:

“... (g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years ...” (United States Code Title 8, Chapter 12, Sub-Chapter III, Part I, Section 1401, Paragraph g).

You can clearly see that the time requirements have changed from ten (10) years to five (5) years presence in the United States and from five (5) years to two (2) years after the age of fourteen (14).

Now, current law DOES have a non-retroactive clause, but it states:

“Nothing in this subchapter shall be applied in contravention of the provisions of any treaty or convention to which the United States is a party and which has been ratified by the Senate before December 25, 1952 ... United States Code Title 8, Chapter 12, Sub-Chapter III, Part III, Section 1489).

I assume that this means that it applies to ALL of Sub-Chapter III and NOT to just Part III. However, I am NOT sure. Also, I do NOT know what (if any) conventions and/or treaties were in effect before December 25,1952.

AND, like I said, I DO NOT know if the current law (with its changed requirements and NO non-retroactive citizenship clause) has EVER been tested by SCOTUS.

Quite a mouthful, I know ... and it is as clear as mud ...

Obamas mother gave up her us citizenship and became a citizen of Indonesia