Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yup, that carried over the United States since we were the colonies of Great Britain.
Or are you unaware of our history?
Apparently, you are.
I'll be the first to break the news to you... The U.S. declared independence from the U.K. in 1776.
Are you also unaware that we are citizens, not subjects?
Just so you know... several states denied citizenship to those born to foreigners, even after ratification of the 14th Amendment. And doing so wasn't unconstitutional because those born to a foreign parent and therefore born a foreign subject/citizen were not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. See my earlier post.
More on jurisdiction...
The U.S. asserts JURISDICTION to tax on the basis of two factors: source of income, and citizenship. If a foreign individual or corporation receives income from a U.S. source, that income is subject to tax. If a U.S. citizen living abroad received income from a foreign source, that income is subject to tax merely because of the U.S. citizenship of the receiver. The IRS Office of Assistant Commissioner (International) has primary jurisdiction for overseas taxpayers.
Thus we have a perfect example of WORLDWIDE JURISDICTION over a country's citizens within a certain area: The U.S. taxes the foreign-source income of U.S. citizens living abroad.
The same principle applies to the U.K.'s birthright citizenship law (in Obama's case, the British Nationality Act of 1948). The U.K. had WORLDWIDE JURISDICTION to bestow automatic British citizenship at birth to any child born worldwide to a British father provided that the father of such a person is not a citizen of the U.K. by descent only.
Obama was born a Brit via his alien father. The DNC has already admitted that the British Nationality Act of 1948 "governed" (exact quote) his status. As such, Obama was NOT under the complete jurisdiction of the U.S. at birth, as required by the 14th Amendment and confirmed by the citizenship clause's author. Obama was born under the U.K.'s citizenship jurisdiction, both subject to a foreign power and owing allegiance to somebody else.
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
Just make a list enumerating the many types of citizens you regard as Natural Born Citizens.
Would you DO that?
For me?
It would be important to Ted Cruz lovers.
I go with what's in Title 8 because I think it's law. But the problem is, it doesn't sue NBC either.
That's why I'm mostly arguing logic. If you don't believe Title 8 defines NBC then OK. We differ.
I would like to know what people that reject this law think the law is for. Or maybe they acknowledge Congress passed the law for NBC purposes but don't agree it's valid.
And I stated that even if I believe the law mentioned it is untested for presidential purposes. In order to be tested it would have to be sued out between the time of the party's nomination and before the swearing in of the winner. That's hard to do. It is my position that once the oath of office is executed (or perhaps when the Electors cast their vote) no court is going to touch it. You can sue the SOS to change laws for the future but you'll never get someone out of the Oval once they are sworn in without Congress.
But you claimed that "Obama's father's permanent domicile would have been listed on his British (Colony and Protectorate of Kenya) Passport as 'Kenya.'"
I have posted that passport. Now either show me where it lists his permanent domicile as "Kenya" or admit that you had your head up your ass again and were simply making up bull****.
Residence: Kenya Colony
Feel free to dispute that with Obama's father's U.S. passport...
I linked you to Title 18 to show you how lazy it is to refer someone to a large document to "prove a point" without highlighting what you're talking about.
You're the only one being lazy. Of course, you would have to be because the facts DON'T support your ridiculous opinion.
I've linked exact historical quotes and data. Time after time.
The U.S. declared independence from the U.K. in 1776.
But not from British common law.
As SCOTUS has told us:
Quote:
The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Are you also unaware that we are citizens, not subjects?
They are the same thing.
As SCOTUS has told us:
Quote:
The term "citizen," as understood in our law, is precisely analogous to the term "subject" in the common law, and the change of phrase has entirely resulted from the change of government. The sovereignty has been transferred from one man to the collective body of the people, and he who before as a "subject of the king" is now "a citizen of the State."
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Just so you know... several states denied citizenship to those born to foreigners, even after ratification of the 14th Amendment.
Too bad that according to the Constitution no state has the power to deny citizenship to those who are already granted citizenship under the Constitution as originally established.
As the Constitution tells us:
Quote:
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
The U.S. asserts JURISDICTION to tax on the basis of two factors: source of income, and citizenship. If a foreign individual or corporation receives income from a U.S. source, that income is subject to tax. If a U.S. citizen living abroad received income from a foreign source, that income is subject to tax merely because of the U.S. citizenship of the receiver. The IRS Office of Assistant Commissioner (International) has primary jurisdiction for overseas taxpayers.
Such jurisdiction is, of course, merely theoretical until the individual returns to actual jurisdiction on US soil.
As SCOTUS has told us:
Quote:
The jurisdiction of a nation within its own territory, is exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation not imposed by itself. Any restriction deriving validity from an external source would imply a diminution of its sovereignty to the extent of that restriction, and an investment of that sovereignty to the same extent in that power which could impose such restriction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Thus we have a perfect example of WORLDWIDE JURISDICTION over a country's citizens within a certain area: The U.S. taxes the foreign-source income of U.S. citizens living abroad.
Nonsense. US jurisdiction over those citizens does not exist at all until they return to actual jurisdiction on US soil. US jurisdiction extends no further than our own borders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Obama was born a Brit via his alien father
And of course, nobody cares. A person can have as many other citizenship as other countries are willing to give them. As long as one of the is natural born US citizen, they are eligible for the presidency.
I realize you can't think straight, so I've given you these two hints.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
