Posted on 02/13/2009 2:41:18 AM PST by SvenMagnussen
A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be "monetary sanctions" against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn't qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution's demand for a "natural born" citizen in that post.
The suggestion came in an exchange of e-mails and documents in a case brought by former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others in California. The case originally sought to have the state's electors ordered to withhold their votes for Obama until his eligibility was established. Since his inauguration, it has been amended to seek a future requirement for a vetting process, in addition to the still-sought unveiling of Obama's records.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/Citizenship_2004.pdf
Ways of Becoming a Citizen
Citizenship by Birth
In general, citizenship is conferred upon a child automatically at birth. While there is no universal rule concerning citizenship and nationality, most nations follow the legal principles of jus soli or jus sanguinis, or a combination of the two.
Jus soli is the right of birthplace, i.e., citizenship is conferred at birth when a child is born within the borders of the nation. This principle dictates that persons born in a country automatically become citizens of that country, regardless of their parents’ citizenship or legal residence.
Jus sanguinis is the right of blood. In other words, citizenship is earned by inheriting the nationality of one’s parents. Under this principle, a child born abroad may derive citizenship from his or her parents, thus becoming a citizen of the parents’ country of citizenship. Alternatively, a child born in a country that follows the principle of jus sanguinis does not automatically become a citizen of that country unless the parents are citizens.
In practice, the citizenship laws of many countries follow a combination of both principles. For example, in the United States, in almost all cases, a child born within the borders of the country becomes a citizen, regardless of the parents’ nationality (jus soli). In addition, a child born abroad of U.S. citizen parents is also a United States citizen, with certain exceptions (jus sanguinis). The United Kingdom, on the other hand, requires at least one parent to be a citizen or settled in the United Kingdom for a child born in the country to be a citizen.
Legal Context of Dual Nationality
The Hague Convention of 1930 stated that the each nation is responsible for determining who may be a citizen or national of their country and declared that dual nationality, or dual citizenship, is undesirable.
Dual nationality may be acquired through a variety of means, depending on the citizenship and naturalization laws of the countries involved:211
1. Birth: A child born in a country that follows the principle of jus soli acquires the citizenship of that country by the fact of being born within that country. However, that child may also acquire the citizenship of his or her parent(s) if the parent(s) is a citizen of another country and that country follows the rule of jus sanguinis, by which a child derives citizenship through his or her parent(s).
2. Marriage: In certain countries, a person can automatically acquire the citizenship of his or her spouse upon marriage.
3. Naturalization: Some countries permit naturalization without renunciation of former citizenship. Similarly, some countries do not automatically revoke a person’s citizenship when another citizenship is acquired.
4. Treaty: Some countries have agreement with certain other countries permitting dual citizenship among their respective nationals.
5. Default: A person naturalized by another country without the approval of his or her country of origin may be considered to still be a citizen of the original country. This could happen, for example, in the case where the original country is not notified that another citizenship has been acquired and, thus, that individual continues to be recognized by the original country of citizenship. Further, in some countries, citizenship may never be lost, thus the acquisition of another citizenship results in the individual having dual citizenship.212
While some countries recognize dual nationality, others do not. One problem associated with possessing the citizenship of two countries is that there may be situations in which the obligations of a dual citizen are in conflict. An example of this is conflicting military obligations making it difficult or impossible for a dual national to fulfill the obligations of both countries.213 There also may be penalties for failure to meet certain obligations while absent from one country of nationality, or one country may not recognize the other nationality, therefore denying consular assistance from the foreign government.214
U.S. Policy
The current citizenship and immigration laws of the United States do not specifically address dual nationality. According to the State Department, “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.”216 The State Department notes that problems may arise from
• claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens that may conflict with U.S. law;
• conflicts that arise from a dual national’s allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country;
• dual nationals are required to obey the laws of both countries, which may be in conflict; and
• each country having the right to enforce its laws, particularly when the dual national is in that country.
Further, U.S. Government efforts to assist its dual citizens abroad may be limited. In particular, the country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance.
Excellent post.
It's important to look at archive info that hasn't been manipulated by the Obots. I will not post all of that here for that reason.
Also VERY good: http://www.richw.org/dualcit/policies.html
Also: http://www.haitiwebs.com/showthread.php?t=48096
The problem of dual citizenship in the United States. In many cases, Am. citizens could be citizens of other States. Existing legislation allows them to maintain two (or more) of citizenship, where am. citizens have another nationality by birth or have acquired the citizenship of another State, having already am. and the laws of another state does not require a formal renunciation of U.S. citizenship.
By virtue of the fact that at present there is no U.S. treaties with other countries on mutual recognition of nationalities, the term dual citizenship applies universally to all cases of multiple nationality. For the purposes of s. Government's concept of dual nationality means that they face two or more countries simultaneously, and each one has its own citizenship laws based on a system of law of the country.
Traditionally, followers of the practice of rigid approaches to cases of multiple U.S. Department of State - whose role is to determine the citizenship status of Americans held abroad or applying for a passport in the country - in recent years to track any longer, even when foreign. s become citizens. citizenship by naturalization, but want to retain their current citizenship of another country.
By acquiring United States citizenship, a person under oath renounces citizenship of other countries and, in theory, a mismatch that oath may result in loss Am. citizenship. But from a legal point of view Am. oath will not affect the validity of the citizenship laws of other states, and the person taking am. citizenship, in most cases is not automatically deprived of their existing citizenship. On the one hand, the U.S. did not formally make the newly naturalized citizen to contact the consulate of his first State of nationality and to renounce it, on the other hand, not doing so, the person as though indirectly suggests insincerity of their oath, which previously often led to a loss of U.S. citizenship . Now, to avoid confusing multiple trials (and from multiple cases is here for hundreds of thousands), fed. U.S. authorities prefer «blind» to the problem.
Official. U.S. position with regard to dual citizenship, which is guided by State Department, has been set forth in his telegram am. consulates and embassies on April 16. 1990. (67 Interpreter Releases 799, 23.07.90, 67 Interpreter Releases 1092, 01.10.90).
The preamble of the telegram states that «the changes in the interpretation of the law on nationality, make it increasingly difficult to review contested cases ... In the past, our response was to increase the man-hours, a full hearing, as well as improving education and training. However, significant changes in the process to ensure impartial, quick and justifies the decision ... and »
According to the latest revision of the INA (Section 349), U.S. citizens could lose their citizenship by voluntarily committing a series of actions with the intent to abandon am. citizenship. These include: naturalization in foreign. State; taking the oath or solemn declaration of fidelity Foreign. State or its policy. offices, service in foreign armies. States involved in hostilities against the United States, as well as the officer rank in the Foreign Troops. States occupation government. positions in the Foreign. State, the state of nationality of that State, or taking an oath on appointment to the post, a formal renunciation of U.S. citizenship before the employee s. Consular office abroad, a formal renunciation of Am. Citizenship in the U.S. (but only in time of war); state. treason.
All of the above may result in loss of citizenship, just as committed with the intention of relinquishing it. To determine whether the actions of a citizen in the U.S. so, State Department uses «Uniform Admin. standard of proof »(Uniform Administrative Standard of Evidence), which is based on the assumption that« am. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship if (a) Naturalization of Foreign. State, and (b) signing the declaration of foreign allegiance. State in accordance with established practice there, or (c) accepting an offer «nepolit. work in foreign. Government ».
In accordance with this presumption, a U.S. citizen, committing acts falling within paragraphs (a), (c) and (c), shall not be obliged to declare in advance their intention to retain citizenship, because it is stored for them automatically.
If the cases, the relevant section 349, paragraphs 1,2,3,4, are in the field of view Am. consular officer, he may ask a citizen, whether he committed his acts with the intent to abandon am. citizenship. After receiving otritsat. response, U.S. Consul confirms official. that the actions of citizens do not bear in itself the intention of renunciation of citizenship, and, accordingly, the U.S. citizenship of that person's remains.
When you put. reply, this person will be asked to fill out special. questionnaire to determine its relationship to U.S. citizenship. By filling out the questionnaire and sign a statement of voluntary relinquishment of citizenship, Am. Consul prepare a certificate of loss of nationality. Certificate, in turn, forwarded for consideration and decision in the State Department.
Adm. standard of proof does not apply if the person is formally renounce U.S. citizenship before the Am. Consul abroad, took the state. post «policy. level »in Foreign. State has committed an act of state. treason or «being in the status of immigrant, committed an act so inconsistent with U.S. citizenship, which they regarded as the intention of the voluntary renunciation of citizenship».
Three recent cases are considered am. consular service on an individual basis.
In all other cases, the presence of the U.S. citizenship of a citizen of another state does not create a direct threat to his am. citizenship.
Recognized that a person can have dual citizenship by virtue of the laws the United States and another State, not by choice (for example, a child born abroad of Am. Parents can be a U.S. citizen and country of birth). U.S. citizen may acquire foreign. citizenship by marriage to an alien, a naturalized American, is not necessarily lose the citizenship of the country of birth, American by another nationality in virtue of certain circumstances, automatically, does not risk losing U.S. citizenship.
U.S. citizen is obliged to leave and arrive in the country on AM. passport, but the second State may require the same in his regard. Using a U.S. passport of another country did not pose the threat of Am. citizenship.
At the same time, it is assumed that a person with dual citizenship are equally loyal to the United States and another State. They are required to obey the laws of both countries and each country has the right to enforce its national laws there are. At the same time, when an insoluble conflict between states (eg, war), dual nationals must comply with the U.S. and am faithful. laws even in the hostile country to maintain their citizenship in the future (U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kawakita v. US; 343 US 717, 1952).
While the U.S. recognizes the possibility of two or more nationalities to its citizens, Am. Government does not encourage multiple because of potential problems that it may represent. The jurisdiction of another State to U.S. citizens with dual citizenship may be contrary to the laws of the United States and limit the possibility of am. Government to promote it abroad, because domicile country has more rights to it.
U.S. law does not consider himself the subject of dual citizenship and does not require citizens to choose one of two or more nationalities. Quite the contrary. In one of the basic immigration status Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 US 253, 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court used the reasoning of 14 amendments to the Constitution, to affirm the right of Am. Citizens for dual citizenship (the first sentence of the amendment, the so-called «item on citizenship», states that «All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subordinate jurisdictions onyh are U.S. citizens and the state in which they reside»).
Afro been naturalized in the United States of Poles, who moved to Israel in 1950. He tried to renew his expired am. passport in 1960., but the State Department received a waiver on the grounds that the law on immigration and citizenship, he lost U.S. citizenship by taking part in the elections in Israel in 1951. Afro sued the State Department and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is still am. citizen.
The starting point of such a ruling was the Court's decision that the 14 amendment elevates the status of citizenship in the constitutionally guaranteed right and, accordingly, the U.S. Congress had no right to adopt a law depriving a person of citizenship without his consent. In this regard, the Supreme Court invalidated provisions of the deprivation of automatic citizenship for participation in the elections in another country, as well as similar provisions relating to service in the Foreign. Foreign armies and adoption. oath, except when such acts are committed with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. Following the court decision on this and similar immigration cases the U.S. Congress has made the appropriate changes in immigration law in 1978 (Public Law 95-432), 1986 (Public Law 99-653) and 1994. (Public Law 103-416).
Under consideration by Congress is 7 bills, one way or another regarding the issues of citizenship, but none of them does not affect the issue of dual or multiple nationality. In general, Am. unlikely to recognize the legal change in relation to this matter.
U.S. has no treaty on mutual recognition of dual citizenship with other countries. In the late XIX - early XX centuries. United States ratified a number of treaties on nationality (the so-called «contract Benkrofta», on behalf of a well-known am. Diplomat J. Benkrofta), but their goal was just the prevention of cases of dual nationality by automatic deprive a person of U.S. citizenship when adopting the State of nationality of the counterparty under the contract, and vice versa. As a result, as many decisions Am. Supreme Court's dual citizenship, these contracts were not feasible, and to date the U.S. got out of all.
great job and thank you for your tireless efforts. I hope all the attorneys are receiving your research.
I was glad to hear there are now five State Legislators who have signed on to Attorney Orly's case and possibly more coming. US Senator Jim Demint may also sign on, but has not as yet. I sent him a thank you note for standing up against the Stimulus Bill and encouraged him to sign on with the State Legislators in requesting records from Obama.
When the truth finally comes out, every bill Obama signed will be null and void. Why? Because he is not nor has ever been constitutionally qualified to hold the office of President. He may be US citizen Barack Hussien Obama aka Barry Soetoro, but he is not a “natural born” citizen eligible to be the Commander in Chief.
Thanks for all the updates, BP2
Ping.
I think that this needs to be verified with USCIS regarding countries with "favored nation status" (Canada, England, France, etc.) -- I beleive that citizens of these nations are automatically allowed to keep their foreign citizenship while becoming an American citizen.
Yes, I know we are to NOT question the wisdom of Fight the Smears and Snopes.
However, I’m sure BHO lost his citizenship in 1967 (as is Berg as you see if his filing footnote references), and certainly has issues with his NBC status and the UK’s citizenship policies at the time of his birth in 1961 until 1983 when the UK’s laws changed.
Also, we need an original version of Kenya Constitution from Dec 1963. It was changed last in 2000 and may have laws that changed in Chapters 87-98 as well.
UNITED STATES
CITIZENSHIP: Citizenship is based upon Title 8 of U.S. Code 1401-1409, dated 1986.
BY BIRTH: Child born within the territory of the United States, regardless of the citizenship of the parents.
Sec. 349. (a) From and after the effective date of this Act a person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by--
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application, upon an application filed in his behalf by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent, or through the naturalization of a parent having legal custody of such person
Sec. 349. (a) From and after the effective date of this Act a person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by--
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application, upon an application filed in his behalf by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent, or through the naturalization of a parent having legal custody of such person; Provided, That nationality shall not be lost by any person under this section as the result of the naturalization of a parent or parents while such person is under the age of twenty-one years or as the result if a naturalization obtained on behalf of a person under the age of twenty-one years of age by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent, unless such person shall fail to enter the United States to establish a permanent residence prior to his twenty-fifth birthday
bookmark
MM:”Provided, That nationality shall not be lost by any person under this section as the result of the naturalization of a parent or parents while such person is under the age of twenty-one years or as the result if a naturalization obtained on behalf of a person under the age of twenty-one years of age by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent, unless such person shall fail to enter the United States to establish a permanent residence prior to his twenty-fifth birthday.”
I am not so sure that this distinctly covers the case when someone is adopted by a native of the foreign country. The first part obviously does not apply (”result of the naturalization of a parent or parents”) because his adopted father - assuming he was adopted - was not naturalized. And the second condition is questionable as to whether it applies either (”result if a naturalization obtained on behalf of a person...by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent”). If BHO was adopted, there was no naturization applied for. He became a citizen by parentage. At least that is how I believe the US would handle an adoption of a foreign child and I assume this is the case for Indonesia as well.
I think the statute that you quote only applies to children of parents/guardians that become naturalized in a foreign country (are not native born) and desire their offspring to take on citizenship along with themselves.
However, I’m sure BHO lost his citizenship in 1967 (as is Berg as you see if his filing footnote references)
Yes, finding out what's what about Obama's citizen Kenyan status, instead of taking Obama's word. Great post as usual BP2.
That O’Bammy Troll Still Here?!?!...
Could he, BHO Sr, be drafted? Could he vote? Could he serve on a jury? Could he hold a job?
Except perhaps for the latter, and that with restrictions, the answer would be no. Permanent residents and citizens could be drafted, citzens can vote and serve on juries. Both can hold any job they can get.
Nationals and citizens of the United States at birth
Sec. 1401 The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
Nationals and citizens of the United States at birth
Sec. 301 (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(1) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
It is for each State to determine under its own law who are its nationals.
A person who, upon the attainment of the age of twenty-one years, is a citizen of Kenya and also a citizen of some country other than Kenya shall, subject to subsection (7), cease to be a citizen of Kenya upon the specified date unless he has renounced his citizenship of that other country, taken the oath of allegiance and, in the case of a person who was born outside Kenya, made and registered such declaration of his intentions concerning residence as may be prescribed by or under an Act of Parliament.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.