Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kansas58
Madison clearly stated that Congress had the ability to define Citizenship.
Where? Just you saying it doesn't prove it.

YES, “positive law” trumps anything you have tried to come up with.
I haven't tried to "come up with" anything. I'm asking you a question based upon a reply you made and you refuse to answer it.

A person who becomes a citizen, based on the laws of this country,in force at the moment of birth, is a Natural Born Citizen.
Which laws? Are positive laws what make them so?

Nothing that you wrote directly answers my question so would you mind doing so.

And here is something that tells me you know all too well what the issue is really about and how it should rightly be viewed.

Congressional legislation trumps Vattel.
See, Congress can only pass legislation that concerns naturalization, not natural born citizenship. You know it and you don't want to admit it as doing so completely disintegrates your whole disingenuous argument.

137 posted on 02/22/2012 10:38:56 PM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies ]


To: philman_36
See, Congress can only pass legislation that concerns naturalization, not natural born citizenship.

Exactly.

139 posted on 02/22/2012 10:43:45 PM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

To: philman_36

“It is an established maxim, received by all political writers that every person owes a natural allegiance to the government of that country in which he is born. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection… The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.”
Zephaniah Swift, A system of the laws of the state of Connecticut: in six books, Volumes 1-2 of A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut: pg. 163,167 (1795)
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_2s6.html
The following is an enormous list of legal citations, from Obama operatives, but you need to know what you are up against:
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/natural-born-quotes/
James Madison, The Founders’ Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2,
Madison:
It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/79655719/James-Madison-on-Contested-Election-Citizenship-And-Birthright-22-May-1789-House-of-Representatives


143 posted on 02/22/2012 11:11:55 PM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

To: philman_36

Madison clearly states, after Ratification, that more legislative guidance is needed on matters of Citizenship:


Mr. MADISON.—I think the merit of the question is now to be decided, whether the gentlemanis eligible to a seat in this House or not; but it will depend on the decision of a previous question,whether he has been seven years a citizen of the United States or not.From an attention to the facts which have been adduced, and from a consideration of the principles established by the revolution, the conclusion I have drawn is, that Mr. SMITH was, onthe declaration of independence, a citizen of the United States; and unless it appears that he hasforfeited his right, by some neglect or overt act, he had continued a citizen until the day of hiselection to a seat in this House. I take it to be a clear point, that we are to be guided, in our decision, by the laws and constitution of South Carulina, so far as they can guide us; and wherethe laws do not expressly guide us, we must be guided by principles of a general nature, so far asthey are applicable to the present case.It were to be wished, that we had some law adduced, more precisely defining the qualities of acitizen or an alien; particular laws of this kind have obtained in some of the States; if such a lawexisted in South Carolina, it might have prevented this question from ever coming before us; butsince this has not been the case, let us settle some general principle before we proceed to the presumptive proof arising from public measures under the law, which tend to give support to theinference drawn from such principles.It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its forcesometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general, place is the most certaincriterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will, therefore, be unnecessary to investigateany other. Mr. SMITH founds his claim upon his birthright; his ancestors were among the firstsettlers of that, colony.”


145 posted on 02/22/2012 11:16:21 PM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

To: philman_36

Madison clearly states, after Ratification, that more legislative guidance is needed on matters of Citizenship:


Mr. MADISON.—I think the merit of the question is now to be decided, whether the gentlemanis eligible to a seat in this House or not; but it will depend on the decision of a previous question,whether he has been seven years a citizen of the United States or not.From an attention to the facts which have been adduced, and from a consideration of the principles established by the revolution, the conclusion I have drawn is, that Mr. SMITH was, onthe declaration of independence, a citizen of the United States; and unless it appears that he hasforfeited his right, by some neglect or overt act, he had continued a citizen until the day of hiselection to a seat in this House. I take it to be a clear point, that we are to be guided, in our decision, by the laws and constitution of South Carulina, so far as they can guide us; and wherethe laws do not expressly guide us, we must be guided by principles of a general nature, so far asthey are applicable to the present case.It were to be wished, that we had some law adduced, more precisely defining the qualities of acitizen or an alien; particular laws of this kind have obtained in some of the States; if such a lawexisted in South Carolina, it might have prevented this question from ever coming before us; butsince this has not been the case, let us settle some general principle before we proceed to the presumptive proof arising from public measures under the law, which tend to give support to theinference drawn from such principles.It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its forcesometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general, place is the most certaincriterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will, therefore, be unnecessary to investigateany other. Mr. SMITH founds his claim upon his birthright; his ancestors were among the firstsettlers of that, colony.”


146 posted on 02/22/2012 11:16:21 PM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson