Thank you for taking the time to contact me to express your concern
regarding President Barack Obama's qualification to serve as president
under Article Two of the Constitution. It is good to hear from you
and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your concerns.
Article Two sets forth the principal qualifications for serving as
president. A presidential candidate must be a natural-born citizen of
the United States, be at least thirty-five years old, and have been a
permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.
Before being elected president, then Senator Barack Obama was plagued
with questions about whether or not he is a "natural-born citizen" of
the United States, as the Constitution requires. To refute these
claims, the Obama campaign in June of 2008 released a "Certification
of Live Birth" stating Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in
1961, and is therefore a native citizen of the United States and
eligible to serve as President.
Since that time, numerous lawsuits have been filed challenging the
president's eligibility to serve as president under the Constitution's
"natural born citizen" clause. Some lawsuits maintain President Obama
is not a natural born U.S. citizen because he was born in Kenya, not
Hawaii. Before giving birth, the suits claim, President Obama's
mother traveled to Kenya with his father but was prevented from flying
back to Hawaii because of the late stage of her pregnancy, and
therefore gave birth to the President in Kenya. At the time of birth,
the suits contend, President Obama's father was a Kenyan citizen
subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, thus handing down
British citizenship to the President, while his mother was a minor at
the time of his birth, too young to confer American citizenship.
Moreover, critics argue his grandmother claims to have been present at
his birth in Kenya. Under United States naturalization laws,
citizenship can be conferred when both parents were U.S. citizens at
the time of the child's birth and at least one parent lived in the
United States prior to the child's birth. The lawsuits contend these
requirements were not met.
Other suits claim that even if the President was born in the United
States, he lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia.
These suits point out the President's move to Indonesia when he was a
child and his attendance at a school where only Indonesian citizens
were allowed. As a historical matter, U.S. citizenship can be
forfeited upon the undertaking of various acts, including
naturalization in a foreign state.
Critics argue that the President can easily end the debate by simply
producing his original birth certificate, rather than the Registration
of Live Birth document he has provided thus far. They argue if the
president is a natural born citizen, then producing this document
should not be a problem.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and I unconditionally
agree that the Constitution must always be upheld to the full extent.
Still, in our system of government, the Supreme Court is the final
arbiter of constitutionality. To date, many of the lawsuits have been
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and standing, while others remain
pending in the judicial system. The phrase "natural born citizen" is
not defined anywhere in the Constitution and its interpretation has
never been the subject of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling. While this
issue is currently before the courts, I will keep your views in mind
and continue to monitor the situation carefully.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with further questions or
concerns. If you are interested in receiving my email newsletter
describing important votes and key committee activity, I invite you to
visit my website at
http://murphy.house.gov and sign up.
Sincerely,
Tim Murphy
Member of Congress
http://2politicaljunkies.blogspot.com/