@2011 The Birthers
Can a person whose birth was governed by both the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution and the British Nationality Act of 1948 be a natural-born American citizen?
The real question about Barack Obama is not where he was born, because we may never know for certain unless Hawaii opens its records up for public inspection and forensic tests. The real question we as a nation need to ask and have answered is can a person born with dual citizenship be by definition a natural born citizen.
Barack Obama was born to an American mother, and if we accept he was born in Hawaii, he was born in the United States, but he was also born to a father who at the time of his birth was a British subject, and passed on this citizenship to his son. Obama does not dispute this fact, as it is stated in his website FighttheSmears as a link to FackCheck which states,
When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:
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.
In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.
Now this in and of itself is interesting as it poses the most profound question of our time. Can a person whose birth was governed by both the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution and the British Nationality Act of 1948 be a natural-born American citizen?
FackCheck then goes on to try to explain this aberration by saying by stating a fact and then dismissing this fact as irrelevant:
Obama’s British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom.
But is it irrelevant?
In John Jay’s letter to George Washington he takes the time to underline one word, born.
By underling this one word he is calling attention to something that happens at birth, which makes a person a natural born citizen. In other words, what defines the qualification for Commander in chief, is not found before birth or discovered after, but this qualification is present at the moment.
This defining quality of who is a natural born citizen, was enumerated by the United States Supreme Court, and no one has ever challenged this meaning. True, Chester A. Arthur tried to hide it in the past, and Barack H. Obama, II is now trying to dismiss it as irrelevant, but none have openly challenged it.
On that day, Mrs. Shanks was found under allegiance to the State of South Carolina as a natural born citizen to a community, one of whose fundamental principles was that natural allegiance was unalienable, and this principle was at no time relaxed by that state by any express provision, while it retained the undivided control over the rights and liabilities of its citizens. SHANKS V. DUPONT, 28 U. S. 242 (1830)
For lack of a better analogy one can consider allegiance to be the DNA of a citizen. Just as DNA is used to determine who the father is, the Supreme Court has used natural allegiance in the past to determine to which society (country) a person was a member of. The early Supreme Court cases are full of cases which needed to to determine who a person was, a citizen of the United States or a subject of His Britannic Majesty.
Now, of all the possibilities for personal growth there are in America, the founding fathers seemed justified to reserve one position for only a pure American. To be exact, a natural born citizen whose natural allegiance to the United States was unalienable and undivided.
What does that mean unalienable and undivided, and how does this affect a dual citizen. Unalienable means that it cannot be transferred to another or removed from the original possessor. Undivided means that it is not divided, separated, or broken into parts, and it is concentrated on or devoted completely to one object. Let us look at two cases to see how this plays out. The first case is a person born in the United States to parents who are both citizens of the United State, and the second case is a person who is a dual citizen of the United States and Great Britain, by virtue of being born in the United States to a father who is a British Subject.
The first case, the person who only has natural allegiance to the United States must obey all the laws of the United States, including jury duty, and military service. When in any other country, no country can force this person to sit on a jury or enlist in its armed forces, nor can it make him choose who to support politically in the event of hostilities with the United States. If it tried to do, lets say, draft this person into its army, the United States must defend this persons rights as an American. This person cannot transfer his allegiance to the country he is in, simply because he is in that country, nor would the United States divide or share its control over this person’s allegiance with that country just because this person was in that county. This person has natural allegiance that is unalienable and undivided.
Now lets say that the dual citizen was in America, and in America he must do everything that the first person must do. But if this person was to go England, then this person would be considered a British subject. The act of simply by placing one’s foot on British territory, would transfer his allegiance to Great Britain. It is because this person placed himself under the direct jurisdiction of a country of which he was also a citizen of. If Great Britain was to go to war and start a draft, this person could be seized and made a British soldier or seaman. He could not get help from the United States because this person is a subject of Great Britain. The best the United States could do on this person behalf is to ask, it could not demand for the United States shared control over this persons allegiance. This persons allegiance was alienable depending on the control of the territory he was on, and the control of the allegiance of this person was shared between both the United States and Great Britain.
As stated the office of Commander in Chief, which is an office of the President, was reserved to a pure American. The reason for this is in this role the Commander in chief makes both strategic and sometimes tactical decisions that can affect not only the outcome of a battle, but of the war. If this person does not have unalienable and undivided allegiance to the United States there may be conflicts. This person may act in one way because he has respect for his other country and thus not commit everything to the defeat of this country, or this person could be blinded by rage for this country and over commit our resources recklessly.
With Obama we see a third allegiance at work, his Kenyan citizenship. This citizenship has adversely effected our relationship with Great Britain, because of the conflict of his British citizenship and his Kenyan citizenship. This conflict has had an affect on our foreign policy. Obama unceremoniously returned the Churchill bust that was given to us after 9-11 as a way of showing solidarity in feelings, because Churchill was the Prime Minister of England when the Nazis were attacking London daily. His gift to the Prime Minister of a DVD collection when the Prime Minister brought him a gift of a pen set made from the wood of a British ship that was involved in stopping the slave trade, as a tribute to the first African to be President. As Obama wrote in his book Dreams from my Father, about his grandfather who was a prisoner of colonial Britain during their control of Kenya, “Eventually he received a hearing, and he was found innocent. But he had been in the camp for over six months, and when he returned … he was very thin and dirty. He had difficulty walking, and his head was full of lice.” This is It is not difficult to see the animosity he inherited for the British.
There is two schools of thought on how a natural born citizen is created. There is English common law as explained by William Blackstone, and there is Natural Law as explained by Emmer Vattel. They do differ in varying ways, and yet they sometimes complement each other.
The Supreme Court has ruled that under Vattel’s definition of a natural born citizen, that is one born in the country to parents who are citizens of that country, their natural allegiance would be unalienable and undivided. They also said that Blackstone’s third definition of a natural born citizen, just being born in the country, they were uncertain if their natural allegiance was unalienable and undivided. This does not mean that all of those born in the United States to alien parents are not born with unalienable and undivided allegiance to the United States. There are circumstances where they may be born with unalienable and undivided allegiance to the United States, such as a child born in the United States to parents whose native country does not recognize the right to citizenship based on blood relations, jus sanguinis. But these cases need to be examined case by case in a court of law, so the facts can be determined.
I am a natural born citizen of the United States because my parents were natural-born citizens of the United States and they had no other nationality to give me at my birth, and because I was born in the United States so no other country could claim me because I just happened to be born on their territory. My allegiance is only for the United States of America. No matter where I am in the world, if the United States needed me to perform a task, I would do this because as William Blackstone said, I owe the United States a debt of gratitude for the protection it gives me no matter where I am. This debt of gratitude is not owed to no other country except to the United States of America.
Yet, John McCain was a natural born citizen of the United States, even though he was born in Panama. This is because his parents were natural born citizens who could no give him a national identity except that of an American, and he was born in a country which at the time of his birth did not give the children of aliens citizenship because they were born in Panama. Therefore his natural allegiance to the United States was unalienable and undivided at his birth.
Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. is not a natural-born citizen of the United States, even though he was born in the state of HAWAII. Because at his birth his father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. was a British subject, and the United Kingdom gave him citizenship in the United Kingdom at his birth. His allegiance to the United States was alienable and divided on his very first breath. His allegiance was further divided when in 1963 he became a citizen not only of United States and Great Britain, but also of Kenya. His allegiance may also have been eroded if and when he was adopted by Lolo Sotero and his allegiance was shared between four countries, the Untied States, the United Kingdom, the Republic of Kenya and the Republic of Indonesia.
Our founding fathers knew that the son of an Englishman born in the United States after the treaty of Peace was signed in 1783 between the United States and Great Britain would be still be considered a natural-born subject of the British crown. This is because under the treaty Britain only released those who sided with the American cause from their obligation of allegiance to the Crown. Britain still retained control over those who remained subjects. In fact this is one of the causes of the War of 1812. Do you really think knowing this they would just said, okay born in the US, and even though you are a natural-born subject, you are also a natural born citizen, and can command our armies in any wars we have with Great Britain?
Unalienable and Undivided Allegiance to the United States of America is the singular quality that all natural born American citizens have.