[Mr Rogers]

No, it isn’t a different case. A natural born subject was allowed to have TWO alien parents there temporarily, and still be a NBS. The courts have made it clear - and with very good reason - that NBS and NBC are fully equivalent.

There is no case for the birthers to present. If Obama was born in Hawaii, then he is a NBC. Period. It is law, not science. Science can always debate, but the law does not.

As it was said in Lynch:

“6. Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen.”

That Obama’s dad abandoned him and let him be raised in the USA, while Lynch took his daughter back to England and raised her as an English citizen, does NOT mean it is a new case with new principles to be explored.

If Obama was born in Kenya, he is neither a citizen nor a NBC. If he was born in Hawaii, he is both. Period. There is nothing to resolve.

[Norm Lenhart]

“If he was born in Hawaii, he is both. Period. There is nothing to resolve.”

Wrong.It is a different case by circumstance alone. Saying ‘Period’ may close the issue for you, but that’s all it does. The rest of us will go merrily on our way secure in the knowledge that cases are fought over far less every day.

So yes, there is much left to resolve.

[TigersEye]

Note to the forum: I already called Mr Rogers on this obvious omission earlier but he ignored me and continues to post this drivel.

(pg 250)
6. Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen.”

It is interesting that you omitted the sentence that immediately follows that statement.

"It is surprising that there has been no judicial decision upon this question."