After doing much of my own research on the issue of Obama's citizenship, I came down to the following conclusion:
Obama is not a natural born citizen, because his father was not a US citizen. His father was a British subject, and because of that Obama was born a subject of the Crown and later became a citizen of Kenya and Indonesia, when adopted by Lolo Sotoro. Even if he was born in Hawaii, and his mother was old enough to pass US citizenship on to him, he would still only be a citizen-not a natural born citizen. Natural born status must exist at the moment of birth. It can not be earned, or received at a later date, or by a retroactive law.
Knowing this, we are now being told that Obama is qualified? Yes, he may be a citizen, though I doubt it, but he was never a natural born citizen, and can not be President, if we honor the Constitution.
British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.
Obama's British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:
1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963
2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.
The 14th Amendment does not confer natural born citizen status anywhere in its text. It simply states that a person born in the United States is a Citizen, and only if he is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Obama was not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. He was a Subject of the United Kingdom. A natural born citizen would not be born subject to British jurisdiction or any other jurisdiction other than the United States.
So now that you know what I think, what do you think?
5 comments:
Your comments piqued my interest because I believe the Supreme Court denied an appeal to hear this case. Your observation that "The 14th Amendment does not confer natural born citizen status anywhere in its text" is true. However, Title 8: Section 1401 of the US Code does define natural born citizenship.
Have you considered the possibility of Obama possessing dual citizenship? How would that influence your opinion...if at all?
I have considered his dual citizenship. My opinion would remain the same. It boils down to this:
Barrack Hussein Obama Sr. is considered to be a citizen of the UK because of the aforementioned acts. Therefore, Obama Jr. is the son of a citizen of the UK, so by law, he is also a citizen of the UK.
This violates the rules defining what a Naturalized Citizen is since he did not have two parents who were citizens of the US.
I disagree with your reasoning. Anyone born in the US is a natural born citizen, regardless of his parents' citizenship. See part a) of Title 8: Section 1401.
This is one of the dilemmas facing parents who are undocumented when their child is born in the US: the parents are not US citizens (and therefore subject to deportation) while their child is a natural born citizen (and cannot be deported). You may have heard of the term "anchor baby", a popular term in the immigration debate referring to this circumstance.
On further reflection, Michael, I believe you are confusing naturalized citizenship with nationals/citizens at birth. (See
Title 8: Part II
for law governing naturalization.) The laws are different for each status. Being born in Hawaii, Obama is a US citizen at birth, which precludes the need for Obama to become a naturalized citizen.
I think it is very interesting the media has not shone light on this issue at all. Personally this debate is a new one to me so I find it very interesting how the media has avoided this topic, and it would have probably persuaded many voters during the election.
Post a Comment