“(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;”
zer0 admittedly was NOT “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.
***********
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.
That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children.
source: factcheck.org and fightthesmears.com
************
You can Not be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States if you are subject and governed until the age of 23 by another country. Do you think the Founders would have considered this kosher?
So - zer0 did not swear allegiance to Britain or Kenya (that we know of - although he campaigned for Odinga)
We sure as hell know that he hasn’t sworn allegiance to the US either.
If he was a citizen, then he most certainly was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, regardless of what some foreign nation says.
Sure he was.
As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948.
That's right. And had he robbed a bank they would have arrested his sorry ass and thrown it in jail. That's what 'subject to the jurisdiction of' means. Only those who are not subject to U.S. laws, i.e. foreign diplomats, foreign heads of state, those enjoying diplomatic immunity, would not be covered by the federal statute.
You can Not be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States if you are subject and governed until the age of 23 by another country.
Yes you can. If you live here, legally or illegally, then you are subject to our laws. With the exceptions mentioned earlier.
Do you think the Founders would have considered this kosher?
I'm not aware of anything they said indicating otherwise.