Replies

I spend about 5-10 minutes/shot, 3-4 times/day on these issues. I don’t have the time or inclination to worry about a single specific immigration case from the late 60s. Nor do I have any reason to believe his situation was identical to Obama Sr. There would have been a difference between how a UK citizen and an Indonesian citizen would have been treated by the INS.

I suggest you do not make statements you cannot back up, ie STFU about things you know little or nothing about.

Each case is individual, and hiring a lawyer would be my first step if I had to repeat it. But for the issue of Obama Jr’s citizenship, it is irrelevant. Obama Jr, if born in Hawaii, met the definition of NBC used by the courts. He most certainly met the definition of citizen by birth if born in Hawaii. In those circumstances, if his parents were not diplomats or members of an invading army, he was and is a citizen.

If born in Hawaii, meets YOUR definition of NBC and YOUR interpretation of court cases, not the commonly accepted one. Maybe you should get your family to post on FR, no one else seems to agree with you.

“If born in Hawaii, meets YOUR definition of NBC and YOUR interpretation of court cases, not the commonly accepted one.”

The only court to formally issue a ruling on Obama’s eligibility is the one in Indiana, which wrote:

“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

No other court will even bother with the merits of the birther case, refusing to consider them since the people bringing the case have no ‘standing’. And those who do - the 50 states, each with a legislature, each with a DA, each with a SecState, 535 members of Congress, etc - reject your interpretation.

In fact, the American People, by a vote of 69 to 60 million, rejected your argument. Want to explain again why “no one else seems to agree with [me]”?