Obama is not lawfully qualified to be President
Posted by Legal Watch on Tuesday, November 25, 2008 12:00:00 AM
November 25, 2008
Dewey Defeats Truman! The news media screwed up again…
Everyone said we need to change the U.S. constitution so Arnold A. Schwarzenegger, Governor of California, could become President. “Change” is also required for Obama to lawfully become President.
(This even had me checking to see if I was qualified to be President, as I too, like Obama, was born in the United States, to a U.S. citizen and a citizen of a foreign country)
The question over Obama’s birth certificate validity was a smoke screen hiding the true legal reason Obama is prohibited from ever holding the position of President. As a constitutional scholar, Obama always knew he did not qualify to be President. He just didn’t think anyone would figure it out with all his chanting of “yes we can” and “change”. There is one problem, “change” of the constitution is required for Obama to qualify to hold office of the President.
As they say, “Don’t count your chickens before they hatch”.
The Electoral votes have not been officially cast yet, so Obama is not really “President Elect” as of yet. Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution and the Twelfth and Twentieth Amendments govern the election of the U.S. President. The members of the U.S. Electoral College are elected by the people in November once every four years in a general election; on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December, electors convene in their respective state capitals (and the District of Columbia) and in turn elect the President of the United States. The electoral ballots are counted in a joint session of Congress on January 6 (as required by 3 U.S. Code, Chapter 1), and if the ballots are accepted without objections, the candidate winning at least 270 electoral votes is announced the President-elect by the incumbent Vice President, in his or her capacity as President of the Senate.
According to the Twentieth Amendment Section 3 of the United States Constitution caselaw.lp.findlaw.com
If the President Elect “fails to qualify” the Vice President Elect will take office as President. This also stands to reason that, the President Elect must “qualify” to become President. Again, there is no real “President Elect” or “Vice President Elect” because the electoral votes have not been cast, and no one has “qualified” yet to be President. Note - that the question of “qualification” is directed to a President Elect not Presidential candidate”. So even by winning every single vote in the country and having every single electoral vote cast for a then “President Elect”, that President Elect must still “qualify” to hold office of the President.
NOW for the real Obama qualification problem…
When Obama was born on Aug 4, 1961, regardless of location, he was a "British subject" at birth. Obama knows this and has never disputed this fact. Obama has claimed dual citizenship. It is not relevant “where” Obama was born, because Obama's father, Obama Sr., was a British subject of Kenya when Obama was born. The territory now known as “Kenya” was a British territory when Obama was born and Kenya did not become an independent country until Dec 12, 1963 after Obama was born. infoplease.com
Obama Sr. was still subject to British law as was the citizenship of his children when Obama was born. By British law, Obama was a British subject “at birth” with split or dual loyalties and citizenship “at birth” if he was also born in the United States as he claims.
See British Nationality Act of 1948 Part II Section 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. uniset.ca
Obama might be a “U.S. citizen” if he was born in Hawaii as claimed. There has been much dispute as to this fact. The birth certificate Obama has provided does not prove he was born in Hawaii, but this is not relevant to his lawful disqualification of ever becoming President. The birth certificate provided only proves Obama was certified as a live birth by the Hawaiians, again not really relevant to his lawful disqualification of ever becoming President. This document does make Obama a “U.S. citizen” under the 14th Amendment. caselaw.lp.findlaw.com
This Birth Certificate does not confirm or prove Obama is a “natural born citizen” as described by the founding fathers in the constitutional qualification to becoming President. “Natural born citizen” does not refer to “where” or “how” you were born.
Therefore; Obama is a U.S. citizen born in the United States according to his Hawaiian birth certificate, but he is not necessarily a “natural born citizen”. “Natural born citizen” does not refer to “where” or “how” you were born. It refers to your citizen status at birth. Obama by law was without question, a British subject at birth. Obama’s U.S. Citizen Status is not relevant, because Obama was a British subject at birth; Obama is not lawfully qualified to ever become President of the United States.
See Article II Section (1) of the U.S. Constitution law.cornell.edu
“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.”
There is a legal difference between "U.S. Citizen" and "Natural Born Citizen" as you know. The Supreme Court has ruled on this in prior cases where the “President Elect” had been born in a U.S. territory. Each time it was clear the person had to be “at birth” loyal only to the United States. If you are born within the U.S. or its territories, you are not automatically a "Natural Born Citizen", but by law you are a "U.S. Citizen". (See link to Amendment XIV U.S. Constitution above). No where does the 14th Amendment confer “natural born” citizen status.
The foreign citizenship of your parent or parents may directly affect your ability to be qualified as a “natural born citizen” (loyal only to the United States at birth).
Remember the founding fathers were also British subjects at birth.
The founding fathers did not want anyone with birth loyalties to another country (especially British) to ever become President.In fact, because the founding fathers had by birth been British subjects themselves, when they excluded all citizens with British citizenship at birth, they had to grandfather themselves into be eligible for President. This was done by the clause “…or citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this constitution…” Article II Section (1) of the U.S. Constitution. Obama was not around at the time of the adoption of this constitution.
“Natural born citizen” was the term used by the founding fathers in the constitution to describe subjects and loyalty only to the United States “at birth”. As Obama was not around at the signing of the constitution, he is not grandfathered in this clause. Not only is Obama not eligible to become President, but Obama is exactly who was being excluded, “a British subject at birth”, expressly prohibited by the founding fathers from ever becoming President.
Do you really think the founding fathers wanted a loyal “British subject” by birth as President? I think not.
This is no joke. Obama legally is not qualified to take office.
And as a constitutional scholar I think he knew it all the time. |
