68Camaro wrote:Sheikh_yer_Bu'Tay wrote:
Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen and that the child's natural born citizenship is not lost if the child is taken to and raised in the country of the parents' origin, provided that upon attaining the age of majority, the child elects to retain U.S. citizenship "and to return to the United States to assume its duties."
This case has some similarities to the situation with BHO. He has a birth certificate that says he was born here. His parents took him out of the country and he was a child citizen there. Then Obama came back home. The biggest difference is BHO's father. BHO senior was never a US Citizen, nor would have accepted an offer of citizenry for he was a rising star within the Kenyan government.
Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor - 28 U.S. 99 (1830) states that people born on US soil are US citizens. It also states that citizenship follows the father, thus, BHO is a citizen of the USA. He is also a citizen of Kenya and thus a British Subject, for his citizenry follows that of his father, BHO, sr. Dual citizens do not qualify as natural born Citizens because of conflicting allegiance to more than one country.
That is how the founders and framers of the constitution wanted it. They would have viewed a dual citizen, a citizen of the British Empire with horror. They had spent most of their lives in fear of Great Britain and had purchased their freedom at a very high cost. The cost of their blood, treasure, the lose of their loved ones and posterity. They would be rolling over in their graves if they knew a British Subject now was the Commander-in-Chief of the US Military.
While I follow your logic, it breaks down at the end, as both BHO and his father hates/hated the Brits as much as anyone can. You need to sharpen that part of your argument a bit.
I don't know that I can sharpen my logic to fit what you want to hear, but I will try.
The purpose of the natural born Citizen clause is so that only a person with
sole alliance to the United States of America will become the Commander-in-Chief of the American Army (Military ). It is not my logic, but the logic of the framers of the Constitution. Here is the original language of John Jay, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in a letter to George Washington on July 25 1787 (This was during the deliberations of writing our current Constitution):
“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural
born Citizen.”
The founders & framers did not want foreign influence to take control of the American Army.
It does not matter if BHO hates the British. He has multiple citizenships none the less. His citizenship issues are controlled by too many laws for me to list here. Two are Sailor's Snug Harbor (1830) and Elg (1939) I mentioned earlier. Another is the British Nationality Act of 1949. Britain claims him as one of their own.
Also he is a citizen of Kenya.
BHO traveled to Kenya, and as a Kenyan citizen campaigned for the election of the now current leader of Kenya. He did this while he was a US Senator in violation of federal law.
Twice he has done what no US President has ever done before him. He has bowed to reigning monarchs. Bowing to a monarch is an act of a feif, a subject, not the leader of the free world.
That is the best I can do right now, Camero. If it does not help, maybe HPMBTT will jump in and help.