That option is called naturalization. Short of that, Barak Sr. was not a permanent resident and did not have a permanent domicile in the United States.
WKA’s parents did NOT have permanent domicile in the USA.
Gray says they did in the facts of the case, which you convenienly omitted: "His father and mother were persons of Chinese descent, and subjects of the Emperor of China; they were at the time of his birth domiciled residents of the United States, having previously established and still enjoying a permanent domicil and residence therein at San Francisco; ..." He said it again in affirming that 14th amendment citizenship at birth was the ruling, "...of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States ..."
which would have prevented WKA from being a natural born subject, and thus a NBC according to their argument.
Gray made no argument that being a natural born subject makes one a natural born citizen.
But it is more likely that Obama will be struck down by lightening...
Good pun.
The facts are the parents of WKA returned to China and lived there as citizens. They did NOT remain forever in the USA. And while Obama’s father left the USA, his mother remained a US citizen for the remainder of her life.
Under the law, at the time of WKA’s birth, they had the right to remain in the USA - as did Obama Sr.
“Gray made no argument that being a natural born subject makes one a natural born citizen.”
He says that the meaning of terms like NBC is found in the meaning of the common law terms, and says “The term “citizen,” as understood in our law, is precisely analogous to the term “subject” in the common law, and the change of phrase has entirely resulted from the change of government.”
Other quotes he cites in the decision include:
All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. . . . We find no warrant for the opinion [p663] that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution.
that a man born within the jurisdiction of the common law is a citizen of the country wherein he is born. By this circumstance of his birth, he is subjected to the duty of allegiance which is claimed and enforced by the sovereign of his native land, and becomes reciprocally entitled to the protection of that sovereign, and to the other rights and advantages which are included in the term “citizenship.”
And if, at common law, all human beings born within the ligeance of the King, and under the King’s obedience, were natural-born subjects, and not aliens, I do not perceive why this doctrine does not apply to these United States, in all cases in which there is no express constitutional or statute declaration to the contrary. . . . Subject and citizen are, in a degree, convertible terms as applied to natives, and though the term citizen seems to be appropriate to republican freemen, yet we are, equally with the inhabitants of all other countries, subjects, for we are equally bound by allegiance and subjection to the government and law of the land.
But at the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the United States in 1789, and long before, it would seem to have been the rule in Europe generally, as it certainly was in France, that, as said by Pothier, “citizens, true and native-born citizens, are those who are born within the extent of the dominion of France,” and “mere birth within the realm gives the rights of a native-born citizen, independently of the origin of the father or mother, and of their domicil;”
Etc. Etc.
Apparently they quoted these, not because they had any relation to the case, but because Justices are paid by the word...
“But it is more likely that Obama will be struck down by lightening...”
“Good pun.”
WOW! Comprehension and wit of the highest order. Restored my faith in humanity.