Some Obama birth records made public for years

Citizen is included in the US Code LJ, but nowhere within it will you find the term "natural born citizen". I read you posting, I've read the US Code as well, which is how I know that the term "natural born citizen" never appears within either one.

I've read the decisions of the court regarding the 14th Amendment as well, and not once has the court opined on what, precisely, the term "natural born citizens" encompasses. In the 1898 decision I cited there is language that says "as much a citizen as a natural born child of a citizen", but "natural born child of a citizen" and "natural born citizen" are not equal statements.

PrintSmith wrote: Citizen is included in the US Code LJ, but nowhere within it will you find the term "natural born citizen". I read you posting, I've read the US Code as well, which is how I know that the term "natural born citizen" never appears within either one.

I've read the decisions of the court regarding the 14th Amendment as well, and not once has the court opined on what, precisely, the term "natural born citizens" encompasses. In the 1898 decision I cited there is language that says "as much a citizen as a natural born child of a citizen", but "natural born child of a citizen" and "natural born citizen" are not equal statements.

Which is noted as the exception in the US Code excerpt...

.....It's still irrelevant since Obama IS a natural born citizen.

Found this on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Bo ... zen_Clause

Lynch v. Clarke, 3 N.Y. Leg. Obs. 236, 1 Sand. Ch. 583 (1844):[11] This opinion from a New York court extensively reviewed the issue of natural born citizenship, and was later cited by the U.S. Supreme Court in Wong Kim Ark.
"And the constitution itself contains a direct recognition of the subsisting common law principle, in the section which defines the qualification of the President. "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," &c . The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not. The position would be decisive in his favor that by the rule of the common law, in force when the constitution was adopted, he is a citizen.
Moreover, the absence of any avowal or expression in the constitution, of a design to affect the existing law of the country on this subject, is conclusive against the existence of such design. It is inconceivable that the representatives of the thirteen sovereign states, assembled in convention for the purpose of framing a confederation and union for national purposes, should have intended to subvert the long established rule of law governing their constituents on a question of such great moment to them all, without solemnly providing for the change in the constitution; still more that they should have come to that conclusion without even once declaring their object. And what is true of the delegates in the convention, is equally applicable to the designs of the states, and of the people of the states, in ratifying and adopting the results of their labors."

In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals applied Wong Kim Ark and upheld the lower court's dismissal of a challenge to President Obama's eligibility.

It is interesting that there has not been more attention paid to the difference between "citizen" and "natural born citizen".

I'm Happy that oblama, has finally answered hillary's questions!
NOW CAN WE MOVE ON?

Damn straight TPP, we've got important issues like closing Guantanamo, getting our troops out of Iraq, immigration reform and furthering our booming economy by traveling the world. Oh crap, what can he hide behind now?

lol :pop
You forgot a lot more of his lies...