To me he falls under @USC 8 (Aliens and Nationality), Chapter 12, Subchapter III, Part I, Section 1401.
(or the relevant similar statutes in effect at USC 8 at the time of his birth)
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
Son of an alien (@USC 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter I, Section 1101 (a) As used in this chapter - (3) The term "alien" means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.) father and a US citizen mother.
The simple fact that his father, if he had chosen to immigrate to the US instead of just coming here to study (@http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/II/VII/1301 § 1301 No visa (student or otherwise apparently) shall be issued to any alien seeking to enter the United States until such alien has been registered in accordance with section 1201(b) of this title.), shows that he would automatically fall under Congress' naturalization powers and should be the first sign that any child he sired could not be a natural born citizen as they too would fall under USC 8. And it's well known that his father had a student visa and never naturalized.
How can it be anything else? His father had to have been given a student visa under USC 8 just to get into the country to begin with and was automatically recognized by our laws as being an alien! An alien simply can't pass down citizenship they never possessed.
And if one were to follow the exact "letter of the law", even insofar as to the usage of "citizen" and "natural born citizen" and the necessity of Congress and the Courts, to use exacting wording in constructing and enacting legislation, or making rulings/decision/opinions for the latter, then being born in Hawaii is covered by Congressional enactment as well, to wit...
@8 U.S.C. § 1405 : US Code - Section 1405: Persons born in Hawaii
A person born in Hawaii on or after August 12, 1898, and before April 30, 1900, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900. A person born in Hawaii on or after April 30, 1900, is a citizen of the United States at birth. A person who was a citizen of the Republic of Hawaii on August 12, 1898, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900.
That section of the law doesn't say "A person born in Hawaii on or after April 30, 1900, is a natural born citizen of the United States at birth." as Congress can't make such a law as it isn't in their Constitutional powers. Congress wrote the law under their authorized powers.
A concise and exacting reading would mean that nobody born in Hawaii has ever been a natural born citizen.
An exacting reading tells me that even something as miniscule as my comma inserted at that location is not proper and I have to rewrite the sentence to make the necessary correction.
...and the necessity of Congress and the Courts to use exacting wording in constructing and enacting legislation, or making rulings/decision/opinions for the latter...
You forget that these "citizens" begat "natural born citizens. Anyone born there of citizen parents is now a natural born citizen, whether congress said so of the original citizens or not.
How does that happen here? If I'm wrong then tell me so.
@http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2843200/posts?page=188#188
@http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2843200/posts?page=190#190
@http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2843200/posts?page=275#275
@http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2843200/posts?page=294#294