Replies

Prior to the advent of DNA, in human history the identification of the biological father depended on the sometimes highly suspect claims if the mother...augmented hopefully by resemblance in many cases, of course.

From colonial times up until very recently it is ONLY the LEGAL father that matters in determining citizenship of the baby.

Your own personal opinion or mine cannot overturn well established international law going back to the founding.

Minor v. Happersett distinguishes between NBC birth and birth to aliens, but if there is no LEGAL alien parent there can be no alien citizenship or legal citizenship conflict.

This is one of my longstanding criticism of our legal system; an unthinking adherence to precedence and ritual rather than just getting at the truth. It is my opinion that this sort of nonsense needs to be excised from our system of justice. The "exclusionary rule" is another example of this mindless dogma in action.

Now that we HAVE the ability, we should USE it. If DNA is good enough to establish guilt or innocence in criminal trials, it ought to be good enough to establish the truth in cases such as this.

“Now that we HAVE the ability, we should USE it. If DNA is good enough to establish guilt or innocence in criminal trials, it ought to be good enough to establish the truth in cases such as this.”

The DNA truth of paternity does not override legal marriage or lack thereof in well-established legal precedent, that being that the child born during a legal marriage is the legal child of the husband regardless of the DNA.

All over this nation ex-husbands are paying child support for children born to their legal wives even after DNA or evidence shows that the child is not their biological child.

The same with citizenship. DNA does not override the marriage status of the parents. Look at all of the biological children of US servicemen and tourists born to foreign mothers on foreign soil. They do not become US citizens based on DNA.

So if there is no legal UK marriage in HI, BHO Sr. does not transmit UK citizenship to Barry and if there is no legal US marriage to BHO Sr. Barry only has the unitary citizenship of his mother and is NOT the legal child of an alien and not subject to dual sovereignty.

I have read every word Leo Donofrio has written on NBC and agree with it all except that his premise is that there is a legal US and UK marriage between BHO Sr and Stanley Ann, which I regard as an assumption of “facts not in evidence.”

On the other hand Obama's failure to produce a genuine certified BC in a court of law and his "release" of what appears to be a forgery points to a non-US birth.