If you know the following and think me impertinent, I apologize ahead of time. This information is important and many people are ignorant of its existence. Please be tolerant.
If BHO II was born in Hawaii, he is a native born citizen. It doesn’t matter if he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro or not, for his parents would not be able to take away his U.S. citizenship and as an adult he could assert that citizenship.
His father was legally BHO Sr., the father listed on his birth certificate. Mr. Obama, a foreign national, was a subject of Great Britain who registered his son as a British subject. This is fact acknowledged from BHO II.
Note: three types of citizenship are recognized by United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS): native born citizenship (born in the U.S. - jus solis); derived or acquired citizenship (through parents - jus sanguinis); or, naturalization.
Natural born citizenship is not a type of citizenship - it is only an eligibility requirement, per the U.S. Constitution, to serve as President of the United States. It is an amalgam of jus sanguinis and jus solis - born in the U.S. to citizen parents (both parents MUST be U.S. citizens).
Again, this is not a statutory type of citizenship, just an eligibility requirement. Lots of people are U.S. citizens but ineligible to be President.
Your #9 sets out the bottom line for the citizenship issue.
And, it is clear enough as a matter of historical record that I think the USSC would agree.
Your point that BHO went to the trouble of registering his son as a Brit - further deflates any argument that someone else is named father on the BC.
Link please...
I have seen no evidence of BHO Sr. registering BHO II as a British subject.