Trouble For Ted Cruz: Here's Why He Doesn't Meet The Natural Born Citizen Requirement

[Steve_McGarrett]

What are you talking about? His mother was an American born in America. No need for residency periods.

Another who doesn't know the law. But Cruz was not born in America! Dude.

This was the prevailing congressional statutory decree of jus sanguinus at the time of Cruz's birth:

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

(b) Any person who is a national and citizen of the United States at birth under paragraph (7) of subsection (a), shall lose his nationality and citizenship unless he shall come to the United States prior to attaining the age of twenty-three years and shall immediately following any such coming be continuously physically present in the United State(s) for at least five years: Provided, That such physical presence follows the attainment of the age of fourteen years and precedes the age of twenty-eight years.
________________________________________

Anymore questions? I got all the answers right here: Prufrock's Lair: Righting the Confusion of Citizenship and Nationality: The Facts, The Myths and Other Riddles

Psst, Statistikhengst. Do you want to take that thank you you gave Synthaholic away now or later? If you take it away now, I'll strike this question from my post, and no one else will have to know. It will be our little secrete.

You are deflecting, and doing it badly.

You stated that Obama's mother didn't meet residency requirements.

Please explain why an American woman who was born in Wichita, Kansas would need to be concerned with residency requirements.

It is the way the law was set up back then.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 had residency requirements:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.


Obama was allegedly born on August 4, 1961. Stanley Ann Dunham was born on November 29, 1942. She was 3 months and 27 days shy of her 19th birthday on August 4, 1961 to meet the residency requirement for Obama to get citizenship despite her being born in Kansas.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Another who doesn't know the law. But Cruz was not born in America! Dude.

This was the prevailing congressional statutory decree of jus sanguinus at the time of Cruz's birth:

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

(b) Any person who is a national and citizen of the United States at birth under paragraph (7) of subsection (a), shall lose his nationality and citizenship unless he shall come to the United States prior to attaining the age of twenty-three years and shall immediately following any such coming be continuously physically present in the United State(s) for at least five years: Provided, That such physical presence follows the attainment of the age of fourteen years and precedes the age of twenty-eight years.
________________________________________

Anymore questions? I got all the answers right here: Prufrock's Lair: Righting the Confusion of Citizenship and Nationality: The Facts, The Myths and Other Riddles

Psst, Statistikhengst. Do you want to take that thank you you gave Synthaholic away now or later? If you take it away now, I'll strike this question from my post, and no one else will have to know. It will be our little secrete.

You are deflecting, and doing it badly.

You stated that Obama's mother didn't meet residency requirements.

Please explain why an American woman who was born in Wichita, Kansas would need to be concerned with residency requirements.

It is the way the law was set up back then.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.


Obama was allegedly born on August 4, 1961. Stanley Ann Dunham was born on November 29, 1942. She was 3 months and 27 days shy of her 19th birthday to meet the residency requirement for Obama to get citizenship despite being born in Kansas.

You really are that stupid, now aren't you.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

You are deflecting, and doing it badly.

You stated that Obama's mother didn't meet residency requirements.

Please explain why an American woman who was born in Wichita, Kansas would need to be concerned with residency requirements.

It is the way the law was set up back then.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.


Obama was allegedly born on August 4, 1961. Stanley Ann Dunham was born on November 29, 1942. She was 3 months and 27 days shy of her 19th birthday to meet the residency requirement for Obama to get citizenship despite being born in Kansas.

You really are that stupid, now aren't you.

What about the law that I posted is wrong?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Steve, that is not how the law is interpreted.

Obama and Cruz are both qualified under American law to run for president.

Sit down Stats and he will guide you through it.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Steve, that is not how the law is interpreted.

Obama and Cruz are both qualified under American law to run for president.

Sit down Stats and he will guide you through it.

He will never understand it, because he does not want to understand it. As was the case with the Grinch, birther brains shrunk three sizes too small on that day....

Ann Dunham was born on American soil. She is an American. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil, to a full fledged American mother. He is an American and he is a natural born citizen. The birther/racist scum are still looking for something, anything to make him seem illegitimate (he is not, he's legit) because they hate seeing a Black man in the White House.

The nationality of Obama's father is irrelevant, since one parent was a US citizen and he was born on US soil.

Case closed.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Steve, that is not how the law is interpreted.

Obama and Cruz are both qualified under American law to run for president.

Sit down Stats and he will guide you through it.

He will never understand it, because he does not want to understand it. As was the case with the Grinch, birther brains shrunk three sizes too small on that day....

Ann Dunham was born on American soil. She is an American. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil, to a full fledged American mother. He is an American and he is a natural born citizen. The birther/racist scum are still looking for something, anything to make him seem illegitimate (he is not, he's legit) because they hate seeing a Black man in the White House.

The nationality of Obama's father is irrelevant, since one parent was a US citizen and he was born on US soil.

Case closed.

I applaud your patience and your diligence. But some people just prefer to be stupid. I fear you are dealing with one.

 

[nodoginnafight]

You are deflecting, and doing it badly.

You stated that Obama's mother didn't meet residency requirements.

Please explain why an American woman who was born in Wichita, Kansas would need to be concerned with residency requirements.

It is the way the law was set up back then.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.


Obama was allegedly born on August 4, 1961. Stanley Ann Dunham was born on November 29, 1942. She was 3 months and 27 days shy of her 19th birthday to meet the residency requirement for Obama to get citizenship despite being born in Kansas.

You really are that stupid, now aren't you.

Sometimes stupidity is a choice.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Steve, that is not how the law is interpreted.

Obama and Cruz are both qualified under American law to run for president.

Sit down Stats and he will guide you through it.

He will never understand it, because he does not want to understand it. As was the case with the Grinch, birther brains shrunk three sizes too small on that day....

Ann Dunham was born on American soil. She is an American. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil, to a full fledged American mother. He is an American and he is a natural born citizen. The birther/racist scum are still looking for something, anything to make him seem illegitimate (he is not, he's legit) because they hate seeing a Black man in the White House.

The nationality of Obama's father is irrelevant, since one parent was a US citizen and he was born on US soil.

Case closed.

No the case is not closed. Obama is a statutory dual Citizen like Cruz. A natural born Citizen can't be a dual Citizen at birth. There is a reason the founders inserted the natural born Citizen clause as the good Constitutional scholar stated in the video's I posted, to prevent dual allegiances.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Steve, that is not how the law is interpreted.

Obama and Cruz are both qualified under American law to run for president.

Sit down Stats and he will guide you through it.

He will never understand it, because he does not want to understand it. As was the case with the Grinch, birther brains shrunk three sizes too small on that day....

Ann Dunham was born on American soil. She is an American. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil, to a full fledged American mother. He is an American and he is a natural born citizen. The birther/racist scum are still looking for something, anything to make him seem illegitimate (he is not, he's legit) because they hate seeing a Black man in the White House.

The nationality of Obama's father is irrelevant, since one parent was a US citizen and he was born on US soil.

Case closed.

No the case is not closed. Obama is a statutory dual Citizen like Cruz. A natural born Citizen can't be a dual Citizen at birth. There is a reason the founders inserted the natural born Citizen clause as the good Constitutional scholar stated in the video's I posted, to prevent dual allegiances.

He was never a dual citizen, ever. He never had a british passport or a british birth certificate. You are living in an utter fantasy land.

Maybe one day your brain will grow back three times, to make up for what you lost. You poor racist sob, you. Tsk, tsk.

You know you are like kryptonite when even hard-core Righties are avoiding you or laughing at you.

I personally pity you.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

He will never understand it, because he does not want to understand it. As was the case with the Grinch, birther brains shrunk three sizes too small on that day....

Ann Dunham was born on American soil. She is an American. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil, to a full fledged American mother. He is an American and he is a natural born citizen. The birther/racist scum are still looking for something, anything to make him seem illegitimate (he is not, he's legit) because they hate seeing a Black man in the White House.

The nationality of Obama's father is irrelevant, since one parent was a US citizen and he was born on US soil.

Case closed.

No the case is not closed. Obama is a statutory dual Citizen like Cruz. A natural born Citizen can't be a dual Citizen at birth. There is a reason the founders inserted the natural born Citizen clause as the good Constitutional scholar stated in the video's I posted, to prevent dual allegiances.

He was never a dual citizen, ever.

LIAR!

It was confirmed during the 08 campaign and the media never reported it to the masses. Here is what his own campaign website 'Fight The Smears' had to say:

Obama's dual citizenship status is described:


"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."

Again, Obama is not a "natural born" citizen because his father was a Kenyan national and a British subject, as was Obama, "at birth." The Obama Campaign describes Barack Obama Sr. as, "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."

 

[guno]

Thing is, most who question where Our Kenyan President was conceived, hatched or even born ferchrissake, don't give a rat's ass. The continued questioning comes simply from the joy of observing the feeding frenzy it produces. Kind of like throwing chum in the water to watch the sharks wear themselves out.

The term "Our Kenyan President" seems to run a close second. Maybe we need a poll as to which works best?

The white christian clown posse party is still smarting from your better winning both elections, as Bill Clinton said.. I feel your pain

 

[emilynghiem]

Frankly, I think he and others like him, such as former Gov. Schwarzenegger, can serve as more effective leaders with greater impact in other govt positions besides President.

See Freedombecki's thread on a solution to illegal immigrant status by setting up residency in specified cities or states to represent the Mexican national population otherwise here illegally.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/immig...5-sure-fire-cure-for-illegal-immigration.html

That is one example where leaders like Cruz and Schwarzenegger could serve on a local state capacity in coordination with federal and international government. We need more leaders like that, especially if the arguments are to push for state rights and to reduce the burden on federal government. We would need stronger leaders in greater numbers on the state level to handle the demands if we are going to shift this from federal to local mgmt.

Here is why Ted doesn't meet the qualifications of Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to be eligible for President. Cruz did not inherit citizenship from his mother, he is a U.S. citizen because at birth he fulfilled the requirements established by Congress.

Prior to May 24, 1934 the uniform Rule of Naturalization did not allow a person to acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if they were born outside the U.S. to a citizen mother and a non citizen father; during that time, persons born outside of the U.S. could only acquire citizenship at birth if their father was a citizen of the U.S. but not to a father who had never resided in the United States.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada after the 1934 date to a U.S. citizen mother and a non U.S. citizen father, he acquired citizenship at birth under the uniform Rule of Naturalization that was in effect at the time of his birth.

Ted Cruz cannot be a “natural born Citizen” if a person born prior to May 24, 1934 with the same birth circumstances was not even a “citizen of the United States”.

The Constitution gives Congress the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, it does not give Congress the Power over who is a "natural born Citizen. A "natural born Citizen" today is the same as who a "natural born Citizen" was when the term was inserted into the Constitution, it can only be changed by Constitutional Amendment.

Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen"; if he were, then persons born prior to the 1934 date would also of been. Because, Congress does not have Power over who is a "natural born Citizen" they only have the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization and the Rule they established prior to the 1934 date only allowed persons born abroad to a U.S. citizen father to acquire citizenship at birth as long as their father had been a resident of the U.S.

Therefore Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen".

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

He will never understand it, because he does not want to understand it. As was the case with the Grinch, birther brains shrunk three sizes too small on that day....

Ann Dunham was born on American soil. She is an American. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil, to a full fledged American mother. He is an American and he is a natural born citizen. The birther/racist scum are still looking for something, anything to make him seem illegitimate (he is not, he's legit) because they hate seeing a Black man in the White House.

The nationality of Obama's father is irrelevant, since one parent was a US citizen and he was born on US soil.

Case closed.

No the case is not closed. Obama is a statutory dual Citizen like Cruz. A natural born Citizen can't be a dual Citizen at birth. There is a reason the founders inserted the natural born Citizen clause as the good Constitutional scholar stated in the video's I posted, to prevent dual allegiances.

. He never had a british passport or a british birth certificate.

That can't be determined since Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Cold Case Posse of the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office investigated and found the birth document Obama released to the public at the White House on April 27, 2011 to be a 100% forgery. That was backed by a professional Hawaii court recognized handwriting and computer-generated forensic document expert named Reed Hayes, a man with impeccable credentials in the field of attestations. He submitted a 40 page report to the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office investigation team pinpointing the mistakes on the document that the forger made. Getting back to the passport, we've never seen what Passport Obama traveled under to Pakistan in 1981. Was it Indonesian or British?............we just don't know.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Frankly, I think he and others like him, such as former Gov. Schwarzenegger, can serve as more effective leaders with greater impact in other govt positions besides President.

See Freedombecki's thread on a solution to illegal immigrant status by setting up residency in specified cities or states to represent the Mexican national population otherwise here illegally.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/immig...5-sure-fire-cure-for-illegal-immigration.html

That is one example where leaders like Cruz and Schwarzenegger could serve on a local state capacity in coordination with federal and international government. We need more leaders like that, especially if the arguments are to push for state rights and to reduce the burden on federal government. We would need stronger leaders in greater numbers on the state level to handle the demands if we are going to shift this from federal to local mgmt.

Here is why Ted doesn't meet the qualifications of Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to be eligible for President. Cruz did not inherit citizenship from his mother, he is a U.S. citizen because at birth he fulfilled the requirements established by Congress.

Prior to May 24, 1934 the uniform Rule of Naturalization did not allow a person to acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if they were born outside the U.S. to a citizen mother and a non citizen father; during that time, persons born outside of the U.S. could only acquire citizenship at birth if their father was a citizen of the U.S. but not to a father who had never resided in the United States.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada after the 1934 date to a U.S. citizen mother and a non U.S. citizen father, he acquired citizenship at birth under the uniform Rule of Naturalization that was in effect at the time of his birth.

Ted Cruz cannot be a “natural born Citizen” if a person born prior to May 24, 1934 with the same birth circumstances was not even a “citizen of the United States”.

The Constitution gives Congress the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, it does not give Congress the Power over who is a "natural born Citizen. A "natural born Citizen" today is the same as who a "natural born Citizen" was when the term was inserted into the Constitution, it can only be changed by Constitutional Amendment.

Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen"; if he were, then persons born prior to the 1934 date would also of been. Because, Congress does not have Power over who is a "natural born Citizen" they only have the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization and the Rule they established prior to the 1934 date only allowed persons born abroad to a U.S. citizen father to acquire citizenship at birth as long as their father had been a resident of the U.S.

Therefore Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen".

Now I agree with that!

 

[nodoginnafight]

gotta love the birthers and all the conspiracy theorists - doesn't matter how many times the facts and evidence beat their theory all to hell. They just make up new ones and blame the evidence on a conspiracy. What a great racket - you never have to be right.

 

[emilynghiem]

That can't be determined since Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Cold Case Posse investigated and found the birth document Obama released to the public at the White House on April 27, 2011 to be a 100% forgery. That was backed by a professional Hawaii court recognized handwriting and computer-generated forensic document expert named Reed Hayes, a man with impeccable credentials in the field of attestations. He submitted a 40 page report to the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office investigation team pinpointing the mistakes on the document.

1. I thought that even though documents posted online were doctored for convenience, it was generally accepted that Obama was born in Hawaii and nothing was definitively proven otherwise. So the argument boils down to whether
a. we assume this is true, unless proven otherwise,
b. or if we require that Obama prove definitively before we agree on his qualification.
Both sides claim the other is biased in pushing their way until proven otherwise.

2. As for "natural citizen" I thought people were going with the interpretation that regardless where Obama was born, they counted his mother's citizenship as qualifying Obama as a citizen. And the issue of natural citizen or "naturalized" was not contested.

I think this is a valid argument, but if people do not agree, then we are back to 1a and 1b above: WHICH side are we going to count as "the default" until proven otherwise?
We do not agree, but most people are interpreting Obama as valid as President.

This can be arguably "faith-based" as the people contesting it have seen "no proof" to counteract their beliefs; so I believe this is a valid argument that it is "open to interpretation" and not Constitutional to impose beliefs that are not proven to all people.

3. What I do believe we can prove is that Obama's interpretation and enforcement of laws is unconstitutional by imposing biases by political belief that do not represent the nation, but exclude half the public.

We do not have to agree or disagree with his beliefs to prove there is a bias and conflict.

So that alone can be used to invalidate the decisions made by him or Congress that do not meet Constitutional standards on principles and ethics.

The problem here is that the people objecting also have violated the same.
So it would take a combination of people who agree or disagree in order to make these arguments have credibility with public authority, and not come across as the SAME political conflicts of interest that are being protested.

We have grown to ignore objections, and assume they are invalid,
if we sense there is political conflicts of interest or bias behind them.

If we assess the conflicts for what they are, impositions of one party's beliefs over another, it does not matter which side we align with or not, these are still unconstitutional to impose.

But if we are not objective and equal in enforcing Constitutional equality and inclusion,
that is why people dismiss those arguments as purely political and without valid content.

We undermine our own credibility and Constitution because of the adverse political environment and tradition of rejecting any belief we disagree with, instead of defending beliefs of people equally and objectively, whether we agree or not.

If we act the same way Obama does, what authority do we have to hold him or other govt leaders to consistent Constitutional standards or ethics? this is the crisis we face in America. He is more representative of that conflict, than of Constitutional law and duty.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

What are you talking about? His mother was an American born in America. No need for residency periods.

Another who doesn't know the law. But Cruz was not born in America! Dude.

This was the prevailing congressional statutory decree of jus sanguinus at the time of Cruz's birth:

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

(b) Any person who is a national and citizen of the United States at birth under paragraph (7) of subsection (a), shall lose his nationality and citizenship unless he shall come to the United States prior to attaining the age of twenty-three years and shall immediately following any such coming be continuously physically present in the United State(s) for at least five years: Provided, That such physical presence follows the attainment of the age of fourteen years and precedes the age of twenty-eight years.
________________________________________

Anymore questions? I got all the answers right here: Prufrock's Lair: Righting the Confusion of Citizenship and Nationality: The Facts, The Myths and Other Riddles

Psst, Statistikhengst. Do you want to take that thank you you gave Synthaholic away now or later? If you take it away now, I'll strike this question from my post, and no one else will have to know. It will be our little secrete.

You are deflecting, and doing it badly.

You stated that Obama's mother didn't meet residency requirements.

Please explain why an American woman who was born in Wichita, Kansas would need to be concerned with residency requirements.

Deflecting?! Doing it badly?!

Dude!

I just gave you the law verbatim. She would have to be concerned about those requirements if she were pregnant and planning to leave the country. Are you suggesting that it's not important for one to make sure that one passes one's citizenship onto one's offspring born abroad? What? You would have your child to be born a foreign citizen that would then have to be naturalized later? What's wrong with you?

Read!

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again.


(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

(b) Any person who is a national and citizen of the United States at birth under paragraph (7) of subsection (a), shall lose his nationality and citizenship unless he shall come to the United States prior to attaining the age of twenty-three years and shall immediately following any such coming be continuously physically present in the United State(s) for at least five years: Provided, That such physical presence follows the attainment of the age of fourteen years and precedes the age of twenty-eight years.

This is the law that prevailed at the time of Obama's birth as well. Obama's mother was only 19 years old when he was born, nearly four months shy of 5 years of U.S. residency past year fourteenth birthday. Do the math. She could not have left the country and passed her citizenship down to him. That's why she remained behind in the U.S. until after he was born!

 

[Statistikhengst]

Another who doesn't know the law. But Cruz was not born in America! Dude.

This was the prevailing congressional statutory decree of jus sanguinus at the time of Cruz's birth:

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again:

(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

(b) Any person who is a national and citizen of the United States at birth under paragraph (7) of subsection (a), shall lose his nationality and citizenship unless he shall come to the United States prior to attaining the age of twenty-three years and shall immediately following any such coming be continuously physically present in the United State(s) for at least five years: Provided, That such physical presence follows the attainment of the age of fourteen years and precedes the age of twenty-eight years.
________________________________________

Anymore questions? I got all the answers right here: Prufrock's Lair: Righting the Confusion of Citizenship and Nationality: The Facts, The Myths and Other Riddles

Psst, Statistikhengst. Do you want to take that thank you you gave Synthaholic away now or later? If you take it away now, I'll strike this question from my post, and no one else will have to know. It will be our little secrete.

You are deflecting, and doing it badly.

You stated that Obama's mother didn't meet residency requirements.

Please explain why an American woman who was born in Wichita, Kansas would need to be concerned with residency requirements.

Deflecting?! Doing it badly?!

Dude!

I just gave you the law verbatim. She would have to be concerned about those requirements if she were pregnant and planning to leave the country. Are you suggesting that it's not important for one to make sure that one passes one's citizenship onto one's offspring born abroad? What? You would have your child to be born a foreign citizen that would then have to be naturalized later? What's wrong with you?

Read!

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, reconstituted Section 201 as Section 301, which slightly altered the respective residency requirements again.


(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

. . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

(b) Any person who is a national and citizen of the United States at birth under paragraph (7) of subsection (a), shall lose his nationality and citizenship unless he shall come to the United States prior to attaining the age of twenty-three years and shall immediately following any such coming be continuously physically present in the United State(s) for at least five years: Provided, That such physical presence follows the attainment of the age of fourteen years and precedes the age of twenty-eight years.

This is the law that prevailed at the time of Obama's birth as well. Obama's mother was only 19 years old when he was born, nearly four months shy of 5 years of U.S. residency past year fourteenth birthday. Do the math. She could not have left the country and passed her citizenship down to him. That's why she remained behind in the U.S. until after he was born!

But she didn't leave the country, ergo, it is moot.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

He will never understand it, because he does not want to understand it. As was the case with the Grinch, birther brains shrunk three sizes too small on that day....

Ann Dunham was born on American soil. She is an American. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, on American soil, to a full fledged American mother. He is an American and he is a natural born citizen. The birther/racist scum are still looking for something, anything to make him seem illegitimate (he is not, he's legit) because they hate seeing a Black man in the White House.

The nationality of Obama's father is irrelevant, since one parent was a US citizen and he was born on US soil.

Case closed.

No the case is not closed. Obama is a statutory dual Citizen like Cruz. A natural born Citizen can't be a dual Citizen at birth. There is a reason the founders inserted the natural born Citizen clause as the good Constitutional scholar stated in the video's I posted, to prevent dual allegiances.

He was never a dual citizen, ever. He never had a british passport or a british birth certificate. You are living in an utter fantasy land.

Maybe one day your brain will grow back three times, to make up for what you lost. You poor racist sob, you. Tsk, tsk.

You know you are like kryptonite when even hard-core Righties are avoiding you or laughing at you.

I personally pity you.

Actually, he was born with dual citizenship under American and British law: an American citizen at birth by the soil and the blood of the nation and a British citizen via the law of the blood through his father under British law. Kenya gained it's independence in 1963. That's another reason why the birther nonsense about Obama, born in 1961, ever being a Kenyan citizen is so silly. Also, he was apparently an Indonesian citizen after being adopted by his Indonesian stepfather.

But none of that has any bearing whatsoever on the status of his U.S. citizenship. None! The United States does not recognize dual citizenship in any event. Period! And a minor cannot lose or renounce his U.S. citizenship.

It's just more irrelevant silliness from the birthers.

 

[Statistikhengst]

No the case is not closed. Obama is a statutory dual Citizen like Cruz. A natural born Citizen can't be a dual Citizen at birth. There is a reason the founders inserted the natural born Citizen clause as the good Constitutional scholar stated in the video's I posted, to prevent dual allegiances.

He was never a dual citizen, ever. He never had a british passport or a british birth certificate. You are living in an utter fantasy land.

Maybe one day your brain will grow back three times, to make up for what you lost. You poor racist sob, you. Tsk, tsk.

You know you are like kryptonite when even hard-core Righties are avoiding you or laughing at you.

I personally pity you.

Actually, he was born with dual citizenship under American and British law: an American citizen at birth by the soil and the blood of the nation and a British citizen via the law of the blood through his father under British law. Kenya gained it's independence in 1963. That's another reason why the birther nonsense about Obama, born in 1961, ever being a Kenyan citizen is so silly. Also, he was apparently an Indonesian citizen after being adopted by his Indonesian stepfather.

But none of that has any bearing whatsoever on the status of his U.S. citizenship. None! The United States does not recognize dual citizenship in any event. Period! And a minor cannot lose or renounce his U.S. citizenship.

It's just more irrelevant silliness from the birthers.

You can call it de facto dual citizenship, but he never had a british passport, a british ID card of a british BC. That alone makes the argument moot.

And yes, birthers are batshit crazy. And the sun is hot and there is no air in space.