[edge919]

You might want to take a look at Afroyim v. Rusk. Afroyim voted in an Israeli election. The State Department tried to take away his citizenship and the Supreme Court rule dc”not so fast, buckos.”

And??? What exactly is the point?? This doesn't say anything about natural-born citizenship. That concept inherently EXCLUDES dual citizenship. Your example is about a naturalized citizen.

And on Obama’s childhood dual-citizenship:

We've already discussed Purpura elsewhere. The court's claims are not backed up by any legal citations, while the principle I'm talking about was brought up first in Shanks v. Dupont, affirmed in U.S. v. Rhodes and then affirmed again by U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.

[Nero Germanicus]

‘”We’ve already discussed Purpura elsewhere. The court’s claims are not backed up by any legal citations, while the principle I’m talking about was brought up first in Shanks v. Dupont, affirmed in U.S. v. Rhodes and then affirmed again by U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.”

---

You should re-read footnote #2 on page 6 of the ruling in Purpura and the citations from US v. Wong Kim Ark that are in the ruling.

The decision of the New Jersey Secretary of State to place Obama’s name on the ballot was affirmed by the New Jersey Superior Court.