See I told you I am right
from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law#Birth_ab=
road_to_one_United_States_citizen
Of course none of this applies to C-Section babies, I couldn't find
anything that covers that
Birth abroad to one United States citizen
A person born on or after November 14, 1986, is a U.S. citizen if all
of the following are true (different rules apply if child was born out-
of-wedlock):[7]
The person's parents were married at time of birth
One of the person's parents was a U.S. citizen when the person in
question was born
The citizen parent lived at least five years in the United States
before the child's birth
A minimum of two of these five years in the United States were after
the citizen parent's 14th birthday.
INA 301(g) makes additional provisions to satisfy the physical-
presence requirements for periods citizens spent abroad in “honorable
service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of
employment with the United States Government or with an international
organization”. Additionally citizens who spent time living abroad as
the “dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household
of a person” in any of the previously mentioned organizations can also
be counted.
A person's record of birth abroad, if registered with a U.S. consulate
or embassy, is proof of citizenship. Such a person may also apply for
a passport or a Certificate of Citizenship to have a record of
citizenship. Such documentation is often useful to prove citizenship
in lieu of the availability of an American birth certificate.
Different rules apply for persons born abroad to one U.S. citizen
before November 14, 1986. United States law on this subject changed
multiple times throughout the twentieth century, and the law is
applicable as it existed at the time of the individual's birth.
For persons born between December 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986, a
person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true (except if
born out-of-wedlock)[7]:
The person's parents were married at the time of birth
One of the person's parents was a U.S. citizen when the person was
born
The citizen parent lived at least ten years in the United States
before the child's birth;
A minimum of 5 of these 10 years in the United States were after the
citizen parent's 14th birthday.
For persons born out-of-wedlock (mother) if all the following apply:
the mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of the person’s birth and
the mother was physically present in the United States or one of its
outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the
person’s birth.[8] (See link for those born to a U.S. father out-of-
wedlock)[7]
[edit]Naturalization
[edit]Eligibility for public office
A person who becomes a U.S. citizen through naturalization is not
considered a natural born citizen. Consequently, naturalized U.S.
citizens are not eligible to become President of the United States or
Vice President of the United States, which would ordinarily be the
case as established by the Presidential Succession Act. For example,
though the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Labor are tenth
and eleventh in the presidential line of succession, Elaine Chao and
Carlos Gutierrez (respectively former U.S. Secretaries of Labor and
Commerce under President George W. Bush) would have been unable to
succeed to the presidency because they became U.S. citizens through
naturalization. The highest-ranking naturalized citizens to have been
excluded from the Presidential Line of Succession were Henry Kissinger
and Madeleine Albright, each of whom would have been fourth in line as
Secretary of State had they been natural born citizens.
Whether this restriction applies to children born to non-U.S. citizens
but adopted as minors by U.S. citizens is a matter of some debate,
since the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 is ambiguous as to whether
acquisition of citizenship by that route is to be regarded as
naturalized or natural-born. Those who argue that the restriction does
not apply point out that the child automatically becomes a citizen
even though violating every single requirement of eligibility for
naturalization, and thus the case falls closer to the situation of
birth abroad to U.S. citizens than to naturalization. This
interpretation is in concert with the wording of the Naturalization
Act of 1790, that "the children of citizens of the United States that
may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States,
shall be considered as natural born citizens", which does not draw a
distinction between biological children and adopted children, even
though the process of adoption was certainly well known at the time.
Some argue that the phrase "natural born citizen" describes a category
of citizenship distinct from that described by the phrase "U.S.
Citizen" in Article Two of the United States Constitution, and this
was discussed during the constitutional convention of 1787.[17] While
it is true that "natural born citizen" is not defined anywhere within
the text of the Constitution and that the Constitution makes use of
the phrase "citizen" and "natural born citizen," Supreme Court
Decisions from United States v. Wong Kim Ark to the present have
considered the distinction to be between natural-born and naturalized
citizenship.
Most legal scholars believe that the phrase "natural born citizen" is
derived from the works of William Blackstone and depends on the legal
doctrine of Jus soli. For example, in her 1988 article in the Yale Law
Journal, Jill Pryor wrote, "It is well settled that 'native-born'
citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural
born."[18]
An April 2000 CRS report by the Congressional Research Service,
asserts that most constitutional scholars interpret the phrase
"natural born citizen" as including citizens born outside the United
States to parents who are U.S. citizens under the “natural born”
requirement.[19]
Chester Arthur (born of an American mother and Irish father, purported
birthplace of Canada) was sworn in as President, however his status as
a "Natural born citizen" was challenged because he was born with
British citizenship [20] (therefore not jus sanguinis) and it is
contended, on foreign soil (therefore not jus soli). Some argue that
those born abroad to U.S. citizens are not eligible to ascend to the
Presidency (not jus soli), since an act of the United States Congress
such as the Naturalization Act may not overrule the Constitution (see
"Natural born citizen" as presidential qualification).[21]
Presidential candidates George W. Romney (born in Mexico), Barry
Goldwater and John McCain (born in U.S. territories), were never
seriously challenged on the basis of their "natural born" citizenship,
but no candidate falling under this classification has ever actually
become President.
[edit]
hey button start, you liked it so much you posted it twice? <g>
BTW you and I have had this conversation before, and you know, I never cared
about it anyhow, I have never argued the whole birth right stuff with anyone
about Obama, Not you, not here not anywhere besides possibly kidding around
So IMO it doesn't matter, I'm not that crazy about the natural born shit
anyhow as it seems to have changed for whatever season is better fit (sarcasm
inserted <g>) and again I will say it more clearly so you can understand it
better, Like I said earlier........
Even IF the PRICK(Obama) is president wrongfully IT IS TOO LATE
wrote:
>See I told you I am right
>from :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law#Birth_abroad_to_one_United_States_citizen
>Of course none of this applies to C-Section babies, I couldn't find
>anything that covers that
>whack
XML Sitemap
>from :