Skip to comments.What The District Court’s Ruling For “Obama” Really Means
Posted on 03/31/2009 2:41:27 PM PDT by SvenMagnussen
For over two years now, bloggers have been discussing the question as to whether Barry Soetoro (otherwise known as Barack Obama) is in fact a natural-born citizen of the United States, which the Constitution requires in order for one to be President (Article II, § 1, Cl. 5). A natural-born U.S. citizen is someone who, in essence, obtains citizenship without any Act of Congress being necessary. So if you are born in the U.S., you are a citizen automatically, with no Act of Congress needed; and thus, you are a natural-born citizen. A naturalized citizen of the United States, on the other hand, is someone who obtains U.S. citizenship under some Congressional statute. For instance, to become a U.S. citizen, those who are born in foreign countries must become naturalized citizens by following the procedures prescribed by Congress. Also, in order for those who may have ever given up their U.S. citizenship (either natural-born citizenship, or naturalized citizenship) to become U.S. citizens again, they must become citizens through the naturalization process.
(Excerpt) Read more at obamacrimes.us ...
Fascinating reading, on the main. I’ve come to the conclusion that 0bama is NOT Constitutionally qualified to hold the office he occupies. That conclusion is based largely on his obvious unwillingness to produce ANY evidence of eligibility. In fact, he has lawyers fighting every inquiry and every challenge, from the BC issue to the Passport to Pakistan, and even college records.
It’s time to take back the country...starting with this question.
Under Hawaii Revised Statute 338-18(b)Point 9, a Hawaii confidential vital record can be subpoenaed by “a person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;” http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrs2006/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.HTM
All that is needed to view the original, long form, vault copy Certification is a subpoena. It can then be compared to the short form Certification that is posted on the web with regard to place of birth and date of birth.
Not a very good lawyer. His explanation of Obama’s Indonesian citizenship (assuming Lolo Sotero wasn’t lying when he filled out the form in question) and it’s effect on his US citizenship is all wet.
No law or administrative act of any foreign nation can ever deprive and American natural born or naturalized of his US Citizenship. US CITIZENSHIP IS ONLY DETERMINED BY US LAW.
IF Obama was born in Hawaii, then he is an American citizen.
If that is the case he can only lose his citizenship by specifically renouncing it. This is because when you are born an American, then your American citizenship is a right that no one can take from you. No Act of Congress can deprive an American of his citizenship. No court can strip an American of his citizenship.
The sole exception is when a naturalized citizen lies to get citizenship, in that case the citizenship is fraudulent and never really existed.
Naturalization as an Indonesian citizen alone cannot deprive him of it. His step or adoptive father cannot deprive him of it, his mother cannot deprive him of it. Nor can the actions of any court or administrator in Indonesia or any other country in the world.
Unless someone can produce a document signed by an adult Barack Obama specifically and explicitly renouncing his US citizenship his is still and American.
Of course he is American, just NOT Natural Born any more. You have to go by the laws as they were AT THE TIME.
There is a reason Barry is fighting lawsuits instead of just producing proof. He doesn’t have the proof. Release State Department Records. Easy. If he is a Legit Pres., then its WAY easy to do.
Of course, 0bama hasn’t produced any evidence that he WAS born in HI.
Then, there is no logical reason not to release his BC. Until he does the American public can't know with any certainty that he is an American.
One thing we do know is that the Constitution does require a person to be a natural born citizen.
In my post I’m not addressing his birth directly. (though I am not among those who think he was not born in Hawaii).
I am assuming he was a natural born American when he entered Indonesia and explaining how no act by the Indonesian government, or his parents or step parent can strip him of his citizenship.
Losing American citizenship is difficult under US law, and it cannot be lost because of a foreign country’s laws.
If he used an Indonesian passport after attaining the age of majority he would lose his citizenship.
It would be interesting if he would disclose his passport history. Of course he won’t, though.
You are apparently think that he is a natural born citizen (if born in the US) even though his father was not a US citizen. This is still not clear and there are reasonable people on both sides. (Trying to be fair here.)
Not always, particularly when the laws or parts thereof are later ruled unconstitutional.
The controlling decision is Afroyim vs. Rusk in 1967. The US Supreme Court ruled that once obtained, by birth or naturalization, citizenship is a right that the Congress cannot simply take away.
The best sources I have found on the Obama citizenship issue are websites dedicated to citizenship issues in general. They predate O's candidacy and are effectively neutral on the issue since they are providing real world answers to people unrelated to the political questions of the present day.
Using a foreign passport before or after the age of majority does not strip a person of their US citizenship.
Many dual national have to carry two passports, particularly if traveling between the two countries that claim them as citizens.
If he was born in either the Territory of Hawaii or the State of Hawaii, since Hawaii was incorporated US territory both before and after statehood, then he or any other person born there is a natural born US citizen, regardless of the citizenship of their parents, and regardless of any other citizenship claim on him by any other country.
If he was born outside the US to an American woman, then he is most likely still a natural born US citizen because his mother is American and because the residency issue (because his mom was too young to meet it) would not stand up to scrutiny by the courts.
So unless there is a document showing that Stanley Dunham/Obama/Sotero explicitly renounced her US citizenship prior to Barack Obama's birth. Or a document showing that an adult Barack Obama explicitly renounced his US citizenship. Then Obama is a natural born citizen.
Which means we are stuck with the Used Car Salesman until Jan 20th , 2012. God help us all...
I certainly cannot cite or quote laws and legal opinions; but having read everything I can find about this since late last summer, I totally disagree with your assessment. Hopefully someone else who can quote such laws and legal opinions will chime in. Pinging a couple of them.
Natural Born Citizenship is not that easy to define by just being born on US soil when the parents especially the father is a citizen of another country where he passes on foreign citizenship to his offspring regardless where the baby is born. The Supreme Court has not adjudicated what a Natural Born Citizenship is as it applies to the US Constitution.
In all the cases of citizen that have gone before SCOTUS, except the Slaughterhouse cases have skirted the issue unless both parents were U.S. citizens at the time of the birth of the child as in Perkins v. Elg where they Supreme Court called the defendant a natural born citizen. In all other SCOTUS cases that the baby was born in the U.S. but who had foreign parents, they were defined as native born. Native born is jus soli and not jus sanguinis . If the baby receives a foreign citizenship through blood how can it be natural born? Barack Obama may have been born in Hawaii but that only makes him native born since he inherited British and Kenyan citizenship through his father. And if Obama was born in another country, his minor mother could not pass on citizenship because US laws at the time did not allow it.
And if Obama’s momma could pass on US citizenship while she gave birth overseas, the baby’s natural born citizen status would still be in dispute. He still would have received foreign citizenship through his other parent, and would have had to receive his U.S. citizenship through statute. Again how can you be natural born? We can dispute this until everyone goes blue in the face; we will just have to wait until SCOTUS settles the case, and Obama is the test case if they want it.
Thanks. I have read several times that if someone in 0bama’s situation of apparently having had Indonesian citizenship uses that nation’s passport or acts under that citizenhship in some manner after a certain age, he is thereby rejecting his other (US) citizenship. I may not be explaining this correctly and/or misunderstanding it.
Yes, it’s a good chance Obama has retained his Indonesian citizenship, which does muddle up his citizenship issue even more for him.