[hoosiermama]

All the law requires is that the mother be an American citizen who has lived in the U.S. for five years or more, at least two of those years after the age of 14. If the mother fits those criteria, the child is a U.S. citizen at birth, regardless of the father's nationality.

Isn't there a problem with this statement?

[Tublecane]

“Isn’t there a problem with this statement?”

No, so far as I know, unless you take it to mean that’s the minimum standard for citizenship from birth. The minimum is, of course, much lower according to the 14th amendment.

[longtermmemmory]

ok it also applies if we are talking about a father.

[DrewsMum]

Um, yea, seeing as how this was not the law when Obama was born. It was different and proves he is ineligible

[noinfringers2]

My question to Bret is what law and when and how it was adopted. Does his law address the debates and concerns of the Founding Fathers when they specified the term NBC. Bret is no more of an authority than I am. This is just another example of the elites looking down on people in hopes of covering up false and deceiving intentions.

[Doc Conspiracy]

There is a problem with the statement insofar as it wasn’t the law in 1961. In 1961 replace 2 years with 5 years.

However Bret’s general premise, that all citizens at birth are natural born citizens, is the view of the vast majority of legal scholars. You may not like it, but that’s the way it is, and the way no less than 5 judges have ruled in cases involving Barack Obama, the most recent being Judge Masin in New Jersey who said that the citizen-parent theory had no basis in law.

People are entitled to their own opinion, but not to misrepresent the opinions of others.