Yes, I agree entirely. THAT was the point I was making. Some people are claiming that Obama's purported birth certificate is fraudulent because it doesn't show his Indonesian adoption. My point was, because of HI law, that Indonesian adoption wouldn't have been reflected in Obama's original birth records unless his mother and step-father moved legally to change those records.
"Obama, Sr, was a Kenyan citizen, so Kenyan law might matter but HI law would not have anything to do with anything."
How can the law of the place of one's birth "not have anything to do with it"?
You ask:
“How can the law of the place of one’s birth “not have anything to do with it”?”
HI law would be of no concern to an Indonesian District Judge. He would act in accord with Indonesian law and not HI law. He might, or might not, care about HI, or US law at all. You would need to read the Indonesian legal code to find out what he would do. A Kenyan Judge would worry first about Kenyan law rather than HI law. No case would have come up in the Hawaiian courts so HI law simply would not matter.
You ask:
“How can the law of the place of one’s birth “not have anything to do with it”?”
HI law would be of no concern to an Indonesian District Judge. He would act in accord with Indonesian law and not HI law. He might, or might not, care about HI, or US law at all. You would need to read the Indonesian legal code to find out what he would do. A Kenyan Judge would worry first about Kenyan law rather than HI law. No case would have come up in the Hawaiian courts so HI law simply would not matter.