So, if British Law had provided that BO was not a British Citizen, by being born abroad to a male British Citizen, as he would not have been had his mother, not his father, been a Brit, then no dual nationality, and no problem?
Of course, that means that British law defines who can be President of the United States. Babble all you want about sovereignty. Even evoke the mighty power of ALL CAPS, but it comes down to the fact that you want to outsource the definition of American citizenship, all because you think it helps you politically, once.
Oh, and if you want to see a real demonstration of "sovereignty" in WWII, Franco, the Spanish dictator, declared that Spanish law recognized the Spanish citizenship of a number of Greek born Greek Jews, whose families had immigrated from Spain. When Ferdinand and Isabella expelled them. In 1492. That gave the Jews Spanish passports, and allowed them to escape extermination by the Nazis, who, by and large, recognized Spanish "sovereignty" and honored the Spanish passports.
So, in your Bizzaro Birther World, no I had it right the first time, Birther World Bizzaro World, some nation can, 4.5 centuries after a person immigrates, declare their progeny to still be citizens, and we have to recognize that nations sovereignty, and declare everyone in the United States who has an ancestor from there to be a dual national, and thus not a natural born citizen.
Why speak in hypothetical?
Britain doesn't work that way and never has. Shoot, no other nation does either. Name one nation that states if you are born to its citizens off its soil that you aren't a citizen of it. Its insanity to say that. Of course a child inherits the citizenship of its parents.
Just think for a moment, what would happen if what you suggest were the case and you were born on say, a cruise ship crossing the Atlantic. Because you were born in the middle of the Atlantic you aren't a citizen of your parents nation? That would literally have created thousands and thousands of stateless people. That is a situation all nations want to avoid, stateless people are a real headache for a lot of reasons.
Now with regard to how citizenship passes from mother to child, this is something that has changed a lot over time. There was a period in American history for example, where, a British (or german, or french what ever) Woman marrying an American man would take up the citizenship of her Husband. So in marrying an American Man, she relinquished her own native citizenship and became an American. That was actually the case at the time Chester Arthur was born. Doing things that way did simplify things quite a bit. It took some uncertainty off the table with regard to the citizenship of the children produced from such a marriage.
This was not the law at the time Obama was born. However, it was still the case, the father's citizenship carried more weight than the mothers. Sexist yes, but there it is, and there it was.
Regardless of all that, Obama was still quite likely born in Hawaii to an American Mother, with a British Father. he was born American, and he was equally born British, which is why Obama admits in his books and on Fightthesmears that he was born under the British Nationality Act of 1948.
Natural Born Citizenship is a description of birth and states that the child was born under only one jurisdiction, or the child was not. Obama was NOT born a Natural Born Citizen - born under the sole jurisdiction of only the United States.
The Founders decided they wanted to exclude everyone who was born under more than one jurisdiction, so they deliberately included the requirement that the person have sole allegiance to the Untied States from birth, the mechanism used to denote this status is Natural Born Citizen.
Obama fails this test.
You live in the bizzaro world of MSPMSNBC.
Arbitrary foreign laws that make descendants of people who emigrated from other countries to the US as their citizens doesn't mean squat because their ancestors renounced their foreign citizenships or being a subjects, royal titles, et al before the US government before they were naturalized as US citizens, and Jus Sanguinis foreign citizenship was terminated at that point for their descendant US citizens as far as the United States was concerned.
Mostly duel citizenship of today is the cause of parents marriages who are of different citizenships and who passed on duel nationality onto their offspring, which was not the case before 1932. (circa 1922 through 1932 an American women lost her US citizenship when she married a foreign national) Traditionally and naturally, citizenship of the family was passed on through the father and husband where their children and wife became the same. However, since women's suffrage became part of the US Constitution, women's citizenship was soon decoupled from their father or husband soon after in 1922. A foreign women did not automatically take their US citizenship from their US citizen husband. Foreign women had to naturalize as US citizens just like the men.
it just occured to me that I didn’t address the rest of your post.
“Of course, that means that British law defines who can be President of the United States. Babble all you want about sovereignty. Even evoke the mighty power of ALL CAPS, but it comes down to the fact that you want to outsource the definition of American citizenship, all because you think it helps you politically, once.”
Are you daft? How is recognizing the sovrignity of another nation somehow outsourcing American Citizenship? What are you denying the existance of other nations? Oooookay.... No. Natural Born Citizenship means born under ONE national Jurisdiction. By having that requirement in the Constitution, the constitution RESTRICTS the office of POTUS to someone who ONLY has American Citizenship, and has only ever had American Citizenship!
Hello? are you really that dense? By having the specific requirement that one be a Natural Born Citizen, the constitution OUTLAWS anyone who has citizenship of any other nation from becoming POTUS. I would say that this rather clearly PREVENTS any other Nation from having any control whatsoever over who can be POTUS.
So by having the Natural Born requirement, the constitution PREVENTS any other Nation from having any influence whatsoever. Hello... why can’t you get that. It isn’t that tough to understand!
“Oh, and if you want to see a real demonstration of “sovereignty” in WWII, Franco, the Spanish dictator, declared that Spanish law recognized the Spanish citizenship of a number of Greek born Greek Jews, whose families had immigrated from Spain. When Ferdinand and Isabella expelled them. In 1492. That gave the Jews Spanish passports, and allowed them to escape extermination by the Nazis, who, by and large, recognized Spanish “sovereignty” and honored the Spanish passports.”
Spain can do anything it likes, and offer paths to citizenships at it’s whim. It doesn’t matter what Spain chooses to do or not to do.
Israel does much the same thing today. If you have and can prove a certain standard of Jewish heritage, you can become a Jewish Citizen. In NO WAY is that a statement about the condition of your birth. Born to an American Mom and an American Dad in the United States, and you were BORN UNDER ONE NATIONAL JURISDICTION. That is what it means.
Born to an American Mother in America, and to a British Father - are you saing that the fathers citizenship is irrelevant and just disappears? Gets erased as if it never existed??
Well you can tilt at that windmill all you like, but it just isn’t the case. The US State Department has always recognized the sovreginity of other nations, and respects that it’s citizens come here, and doing so do NOT lose their citizenship. Or are you saying that every illegal Mexican automatically becomes an American once they cross the border? Of course not, no one is THAT stupid.
“So, in your Bizzaro Birther World, no I had it right the first time, Birther World Bizzaro World, some nation can, 4.5 centuries after a person immigrates, declare their progeny to still be citizens, and we have to recognize that nations sovereignty, and declare everyone in the United States who has an ancestor from there to be a dual national, and thus not a natural born citizen.”
I was going to try and politely reply to this inane insanity, but I changed my mind. I have never even implied such an idiotic ...concept (if you can even call it that). I can’t even figure out WTH you just said. ALL I said is that Natural Born Citizen describes the Birth of a child.
Natural Born Citizen means born under a sole National Jurisdiction. One. If you were born to an American Mom in America, and a British Father, then you were born under two Jurisdictions. Don’t believe me, them take a look at fightthesmears and Obama’s statement regarding his birth. He says he was born under the British Nationality Act of 1948 and he HAD to admit that because it was KNOWN his father was British.
Or are you actually trying to say that a child never inherits the citizenship of his father?
Maybe you are just trying to say that if a man of any citizenship upon having a child in another nation immediately loses his RIGHT to pass his citizenship onto his child?
If so you are absolutely barking mad.
A child born to an American Mother and an American Father on American soil has no other possible citizenship. That is what the Founders wanted - that is what Natural Born Citizen means, born under one sole jurisdiction with only one possible citizenship. A child born to an American mother in America to a British father is a child born under two jurisdictions, just as Obama ADMITTED.
This is what I have been saying for quite some time now. Not any of the BS you just spouted off in your willful denial of the truth. You are deliberately refusing to see the simple truth. Why I have no idea, but the concept really isn’t hard, it isn’t theoretical particle physics for heaven’s sake.
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. 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.http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html
Factcheck.org goes on to say this about Obama Sr., Jr. and the British Nationality Act of 1948:
In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii)* and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html
Even the modern day State Department rules discusses the problems associated with dual citizenship:
7 FAM 081: U.S. Policy on Dual Nationality:http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86563.pdf(e)While recognizing the existence of dual nationality, the U.S. Government does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Dual nationality may hamper efforts by the U.S. Government to provide diplomatic and consular protection to individuals overseas. When a U.S. citizen is in the other country of their dual nationality, that country has a predominant claim on the person.
...
the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that dual nationality is a "status long recognized in the law" and that "a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both." See Kawakita v. United States, 343 U.S. 717 (1952).
And this...
US State Department Services Dual Nationalityhttp://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html... 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. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance.
However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there...
How can a natural born Citizen's status be "governed" by Great Britain?
It can't. However, a dual national's citizenship status CAN be. Natural born Citizen's and dual nationals, with their divided allegiance, are contradictory in nature.
Having a Commander in Chief of the armed forces who was born owing allegiance to a foreign country was a bad idea (post grandfather clause) back then...and it's a bad idea today. Perhaps even more so with the move towards "globalization."