Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Steel
Great find RS. Specifically, within the "Thirdly" section near the bottom of the first page.

"Or subjects of another state."

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html

Factcheck.org goes on to say this about Obama Sr., Jr. and the British Nationality Act of 1948:

In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii)* and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html

Obama was "born a subject of Great Britian."

The 14th Amendment for "citizenship" doesn't even apply to him. Let alone being a "natural born Citizen."

 

John Bingham, "father of the 14th Amendment", the abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln's assassins, reaffirmed the definition known to the framers, not once, but twice during Congressional discussions of Citizenship pertaining to the upcoming 14th Amendment and a 3rd time nearly 4 years after the 14th was adopted.

The House of Representatives definition for "natural born Citizen" was read into the Congressional Record during the Civil War, without contest!

"All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians." (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)).

 

The House of Representatives definition for "natural born Citizen" was read into the Congressional Record after the Civil War, without contest!

every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))"

No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested. However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the sovereign territory of the U.S.) was never challenged on the floor of the House. Without a challenge on the definition, it appears the ALL where in agreement.


 
Then, during a debate (see pg. 2791) on April 25, 1872 regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen (generally. they were not trying to decide if he was a NBC). Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:

“As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.”

(The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872. And, since they knew he was, without a doubt, a natural born Citizen...he was, of course, considered a citizen of the U.S.)

The take away from this is that, while the debates and discussions went on for years in the people's house regarding "citizenship" and the 14th Amendment, not a single Congressman disagreed with the primary architect's multiple statements on who is a natural born Citizen per the Constitution. The United States House was in complete agreement at the time. NBC = born in sovereign U.S. territory, to 2 citizen parentS who owe allegiance to no other country.


37 posted on 09/14/2012 4:09:37 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: rxsid
It clears up much of the intent under the 14th Amendment. For instance, The Obots, and after-birthers here always argue "The Subject of the Jurisdiction Thereof" only applies to laws inside the US, but it still also applies to citizens of the US who are in another county or a foreigner of another country inside the US. They are still "The Subject of the Jurisdiction Thereof" of their respective countries.

As an example, if a US citizen makes money in another country, (as I recall, exempt up to about 70k but have to pay if they make more) they are still subject to be taxed by the United States regardless that the money was made in another county. They are still "The Subject of the Jurisdiction Thereof" of the United States.

The source at the NYT:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10E16F93B5D1A7493C2AA1788D85F408784F9

You can download the complete article in PDF form,

"CITIZENSHIP.; BILL TO CARRY INTO EXECUTION THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION CONCERNING CITIZENSHIP."

41 posted on 09/14/2012 4:37:41 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: rxsid
"Or subjects of another state."

LoL. My last post was talking the same. [grin] :-)

42 posted on 09/14/2012 4:46:18 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: rxsid; Red Steel

I read that Obama has lately referred to being raised by a “single mother”. Is this an attempt to remove Barack Sr. from the equation?


43 posted on 09/14/2012 4:55:04 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson