The Logical analysis of a Natural Born Citizen
and the clear and compelling evidence that Barack Hussein Obama, II is not a natural born citizen.
What is a Citizen?
Before defining what a natural born citizen is and how one acquires this status, it is important to understand what a generic citizen is and why a country bestows citizenship upon the members of a society. A citizen is a member of a particular nation who has been given certain rights, privileges, and immunities that are not given to people of other nations. Such rights include voting in elections, receiving a passport, and in some countries can include owning property. A privilege nations extend to citizens is holding elected office and some countries extend immunities to their citizens by preventing them from being extradited to face criminal charges in other countries.
Countries do not extend citizenship solely to grant rights, privileges and immunities to people. Citizenship is granted with the expectation of allegiance given to the country bestowing the benefits of citizenship. Countries demand that this allegiance be observed by its citizens and also impose obligations both civil and military. In times of crisis, nations need to draw upon its citizens to establish a loyal force to defend its borders and claims. In all times, nations, use the taxation of its citizens, both individuals and corporations to insure its treasury is adequately funded to meet its needs. These obligations are duties that its citizens must fulfill and that it cannot impose upon aliens and foreigners.
The most basic definition of a citizen is one who is a member of a particular nation and is entitled to receive rights, privileges and immunities from that particular nation that are not bestowed upon people of other nations in exchange for their allegiance in performing certain obligations not expected of people of other nations when called upon to do so.
Merriam Webster dictionary defines a citizen as “a person owing allegiance to and entitled to the protection of a sovereign state.”
Black’s Law dictionary defines a citizen as “a person who owes allegiance to, and may claim reciprocal protection from, a government.”
The Current Methods of Becoming a
Throughout the history of the
A naturalized citizen is a very specific class of citizen
whose existence is defined in our Constitution and laws. Naturalization is the
process by which aliens declare their intent to be a member of the
The last method and the most common way to become an American
citizen is simply to be born a citizen. The
Historically jus sanguinis is the oldest principle used to determine citizenship. It was so prior to the Fourteenth Amendment in the majority of the states when the States themselves were sovereign and created the rules to determine who was a born citizen of that State and by extension of the Nation. Some States extended citizenship to people born within those States (jus soli), while other States granted citizenship to the children of citizens of those States (jus sanguinis.) Each State placed restrictions upon who could be granted citizenship based upon birth. These restrictions were based upon one’s status and race. Some states discriminated against the race of a person, other states discriminated against one’s status as a freeman, bondservant or slave regardless of race, and some states restricted citizenship based upon a combination of both statuses.
The term jus sanguinis describes a person born of parents who are citizens and jus soli describes a person born in the country. Persons who are born only under the principle of jus sanguinis are called a “consanguineously born citizens,” and their claim of citizenship is based on inheritance. . On the other hand persons who claims their citizenship based solely on the principle of jus soli are called “native born citizens” and these persons’ claims are based on the geographical location of their birth. Both principles are equal in making one a born citizen. Being a born citizen extends to them one particular immunity not given to naturalized citizens, in that born citizens are immune from involuntarily renouncing their citizenship. A naturalized citizen can have his citizenship revoked for several reasons, but under current law, born citizens must walk into a US Embassy abroad and in front of the Consul renounce their citizenship.
The only two methods of obtaining
Methods of Citizenship
From this diagram, we are able to make nine logical
statements concerning general citizenship in the
The Reason for a “natural born
citizen” in Article II, Section 1 of the
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. Article II, Section 1
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. John Jay, July 25, 1787
To understand whom the future Chief Justice John Jay wanted to exclude from being Commander in Chief we need to examine the definition of Foreigner. Using the three most authoritative dictionaries, we can see who should be excluded and for what reason. We can then start to arrive at a definition of a “natural born citizen,” that meets this requirement.
MerriamWebster Dictionary - “a person belonging to or owing allegiance to a foreign country.”
Blacks Law Dictionary - “A person who is not a citizen or subject of the state or country in which mention is made, or any one owing allegiance to a foreign state or sovereign”
What all of these definitions have in common with the word citizen is allegiance. The target of the allegiance is different between a foreigner and a citizen. Since the reason for this prohibition of the admission of Foreigners into the office of Commander in Chief, is to prevent the military from being used by non-American powers against the Republic. Jay recommended and the framers agreed that this person must have a natural allegiance that is total and absolute to the Nation and to no any other nation or potentate.
We can look at the citizenship types from the diagram above and make some logical statements of both methods (naturalized and born) of being a citizen in light of allegiance. These statements are made with reliance on generally known and accepted facts.
Naturalized Citizens are not considered for President because of the following observations that could allow the admission of Foreigners into the Administration holding the post of Commander in Chief.
This does not mean
that all naturalized citizens are disloyal or have ulterior motives for coming
At this point discussion will be based solely on the method of citizenship called Born Citizen. As stated above there are two legal principles at work in determining if one is a born citizen. Refer to the Euler diagram below called “Principles of Born Citizenship”
Principles of Born Citizenship
Not all Born Citizens are considered for President because of the following observations that could allow the admission of Foreigners into the Administration holding the post of Commander in Chief.
possible for a born citizen
i. Naturalized citizen parents have renounced their former citizenships to become naturalized American citizens and can no longer pass on jus sanguinis citizenship of their former country as an automatic birthright.
We can now say with certainty that the term “a natural
born citizen” is a person who is born owing to only one country his or
her complete and undivided national allegiance. It is only to this individual
that the Constitution of the
The Unification Principles of Natural Born Citizen
At the time of the drafting and ratification of the
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.” Emmerich Vattel, Law of Nations, § 212. Of the citizens and natives
Vattel’s definition of what a natural born citizen is was first codified into American Common Law in the Supreme Court decision of THE VENUS, 12 U. S. 253 (1814)
“Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says ‘The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.’"
This definition was echoed by Congressman John A. Bingham, who is considered the architect of the Fourteenth Amendment. Although the congressman said this concerning the Civil Rights Act of 1866, this definition was not replaced by the Fourteenth Amendment.
“I find no fault with the
introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the
Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United
States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the
language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen; but, sir, I may
be allowed to say further, that I deny that the Congress of the United States
ever had the power or color of power to say that any man born within the
jurisdiction of the United States, and not owing a foreign allegiance, is not
and shall not be a citizen of the United States.” John A. Bingham,
This definition has been again codified into American Common Law through the case of MINOR V. HAPPERSETT
The Constitution does
not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had
elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the
framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all
children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves,
upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens,
as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and
include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to
the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but
never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to
solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider
that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are
themselves citizens. The words "all children" are certainly as
comprehensive, when used in this connection, as "all persons," and if
females are included in the last, they must be in the first. That they are
included in the last is not denied. In fact, the whole argument of the
plaintiffs proceeds upon that idea. Unanimous opinion of the court. MINOR V. HAPPERSETT, 88
definition of a natural born citizen written by Vattel and recounted by both
Congressman Bingham and the Supreme Court, was what the Framers of the
Constitution wanted when the wrote and ratified Article II, Section 1. There
can be no other definition that provides the strong check that John Jay urged
Using available material the Framers of Constitution and the architects of Article II, section 1 had on hand, authoritative statements made by one of the architects of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Supreme Court decisions both before and after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, allows us to create a natural born citizen matrix.
The Fourteenth Amendment does not make one born in the United States “a natural born citizen,” it only makes them a “born citizen.”
All persons born or
naturalized in the
The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified to insure that no state could or would deprive the newly freed slaves or their children the rights of citizenship. This can be seen in the remaining text of Section 1.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1, Clause 2
This Amendment did not nor does it alter the principle of
jus sanguinis. The principle of jus
sanguinis has been established by the States before the Constitution and codified
into national law since 1790. The freed slaves were not US citizens at the time
they were freed and could not have passed US Citizenship to their children.
This amendment extended the principle of jus soli uniformly across the nation,
hence the term ‘born … in the
The plain words of this section cannot be ignored. There is no term “natural born” anywhere to be found. The reason it is not found is because there are the two methods of citizenship that are joined by a logical ‘or,’ which treats both methods as being equal. What they are equal to is the most generic term citizen. This is the one concept all American citizens share, whether we are a naturalized citizen, a born citizen under the principle of jus soli, a born citizen under the principle of jus sanguinis, or a natural born citizen under both principles of jus soli and jus sanguinis, we are all citizens of the United States.
The most disputed term in the Fourteenth Amendment is the term,
‘subject to the jurisdiction
thereof.’ From the civil rights act we find the words, “That all persons born in the
The phrase ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ has been interpreted differently then what the Amendments architects originally said in the case of Wong Kim Ark. This is a landmark case in citizenship. It is not our intention to take this into the topic of immigration; however it is necessary to examine this decision as it relates to the specifics of a natural born citizen. There is one statement in the decision of Wong Kim Ark that seems to add unnecessary confusion to the term a “natural born citizen.”
“The child of an alien, if born in the
country, is as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by
operation of the same principle." Justice Horace Gray Wong Kim
There are historical factors that
need explanation. But first let’s simply look at the logic of what
Justice Gray is saying. He is saying the principle (singular) that both a
native born and natural born share is the same. We know that a “natural
born citizen” is a citizen that has two principles to claim citizenship
with, jus soli and jus sanguinis. On the other hand, a “native born
citizen” has to satisfy only one principle, jus soli to be granted
citizenship. It is the principle of jus soli that is the same principle that a
“natural born citizen” shares with a “native born
citizen” in making them a citizen of the
Shared principles of born citizens and natural born citizen
The historical factors that need to
be considered at the time of Justice Gray’s opinion are, the right to confer
the birthright principle of jus sanguinis was limited to the father. This right
was not extended to women until 1934 and was upheld as late as 1961 in the case
We can now update our original Euler diagram to include natural born citizens as a proper subset of Born Citizens.
How does this effect Barack Hussein Obama, II and his sworn declaration of being a natural born citizen?
Primarily is the issue of the Certificate of Live Birth that Barack Hussein Obama, II is secreting from the American public is of major concern because it deprives the public of the information needed to determine if he is telling the truth, or lying about his natural born citizen status. Unlike the COLB, which is short hand for Certification of Live Birth, the Certificate of Live Birth has the necessary information to either quickly determine the natural born status of the child or can easily point to further documentation needed to conclude this determination. The key pieces of information contained in the Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth are the place of birth of the child and the place of birth for both parents. (See photo called Hawaiian Long Form from August 5, 1961) If either the father or mother were born overseas, then the next piece of evidence required to validate the “natural born citizen” claim would be proof of American citizenship of the parents of the parent born overseas. This can be either in the form of a naturalization certificate or birth certificates of the parents of the parent born overseas proving they were able to transfer jus sanguinis, birthright citizenship to the parent of the child requiring confirmation of his or her claim.
Hawaiian Long Form from August 5, 1961
Putting aside the issue of what constitutes a legal Certificate of Live Birth for proving natural born status under Article II, Section 1. If we take the information found in Barack Hussein Obama, II’s “Fight the Smears” website we discover the following
Obama is claiming to be a native citizen
On the same page, we see from FactCheck.org, Barack Hussein Obama, II admitting his father was a British subject at the time of his birth. Furthermore the cite states that his birth was governed by the British government through the British Nationality Act of 1948.
This Act conferred the title of British subject upon Barack Hussein Obama, II.
Under Section 5 of this Act, citizenship is passed from father to child.
5. (1) 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:
that if the father of such a person is a citizen of the
(a) that person is born or his father was born in a protectorate, protected state, mandated territory or trust territory or any place in a foreign country where by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance, or other lawful means, His Majesty then has or had jurisdiction over British subjects; or
Note: Barack Hussien Obama, Sr. was in fact born in
(b) that person's birth having occurred in a place in a foreign country other than a place such as is mentioned in the last foregoing paragraph, the birth is registered at a United Kingdom consulate within one year of its occurrence, or, with the permission of the Secretary of State, later; or
Note: While subparagraph (a) makes this irrelevant, we have had neither a statement from Obama, II stating this option was not exercised, nor do we have independent confirmation from an authoritative source denying this.
Using the information contained on his website, we can accurately produce a natural born citizen matrix for him to see if he is in fact an Article II, natural born citizen.
Using both the law and logic it can now clearly be seen that Barack Hussein Obama, II is not a natural born citizen as required to hold the office of President of the United states of America and be the Commander in Chief of its armies as required under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America.
He does not meet the full and complete description of a “natural born citizen,” which is a citizen who has unity of citizenship at birth to one and only one country via by both Jus soli (place) and Jus sanguinis (the parents,) who is born in the country to two citizens of the country. Such a citizen can only have his allegiance claimed by one country. A natural born citizen cannot evade civic or military obligations by repatriating himself or herself to another country since a natural born citizen does not have dual or multiple citizenships by birth. A natural born citizen who gives his or her allegiance to another country during a time of war cannot justify it by saying he or she is a spy or a patriot for some other country for which he or she also has citizenship via birth. Such a person is simply a traitor to his or her natural born country.
Obama’s refusal to release his long form Certificate of Live Birth from Hawaii, his manipulation of facts, his own statements can only lead a reasonable person to believe that he intentionally has lead the United States of America into a Constitutional Crisis.
However, this can now be resolved by
the state court of the State of Arizona, if there is one sheriff, one
prosecutor, one judge, one state representative loyal to the Constitution,
because on December 13, 2007 at 3:01 PM Mountain Time, Barrack Hussein Obama,
II fraudulently filed a sworn affidavit in his own hand that declared himself
to be a natural born citizen of the United States of America, and that he has
fulfilled the requirements under the Constitution. The landmark case of
The question now is can
Barack Hussein Obama II is NOT an Article II Natural
Born Citizen of the