HI has released proof of the marriage vital record, but Stanley Ann's uncontested divorce filing does not retroactively legitimate her marriage to Obama if it was indeed bigamous under the following act:
• See Kenya Marriage Act of 1902 paragraph #49:
49. Whoever contracts a marriage under this Act, being at the time married in accordance with native law or custom or in accordance with Mohammedan law to any person other than the person with whom such marriage is contracted, shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
kenyalaw.org/family/statutes/...?file=The+marriage+act.pdf
If the HI marriage was bigamous (Kenya was under UK colonial law not sharia, even for muslims) then the BNA of 1948 explicitly does not govern the child of that illegitimate marriage:
“(2) Subject to the provisions of section twenty-three of this Act, any reference in this Act to a child shall be construed as a reference to a legitimate child; and the expressions “father”, “ancestor” and “descended” shall be construed accordingly.”
http://www.uniset.ca/naty/BNA1948.htm
bookmark
Yes, I’m aware of the illegitimacy issue under the BNA of 1948. I posted a link to it above.
I have always maintained that Obama is not a natural born citizen because he doesn’t have two U.S. citizen parents. However, I now find it difficult to point to the BNA of 1948 as governing the status of his birth when it also stipulates that he is illegitimate and not automatically a U.K. subject.
I’m researching the issue further. This little fact is troublesome to the whole argument that he is not a natural born citizen.