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

Skip to comments.

On the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen”
Harvard Law Review ^ | MAR 11, 2015 | Neal Katyal & Paul Clement

Posted on 10/20/2018 1:57:10 PM PDT by Jack Black

PDF We have both had the privilege of heading the Office of the Solicitor General during different administrations. We may have different ideas about the ideal candidate in the next presidential election, but we agree on one important principle: voters should be able to choose from all constitutionally eligible candidates, free from spurious arguments that a U.S. citizen at birth is somehow not constitutionally eligible to serve as President simply because he was delivered at a hospital abroad.

The Constitution directly addresses the minimum qualifications necessary to serve as President. In addition to requiring thirty-five years of age and fourteen years of residency, the Constitution limits the presidency to “a natural born Citizen.” 1. U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 5. All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase “natural born Citizen” has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time. And Congress has made equally clear from the time of the framing of the Constitution to the current day that, subject to certain residency requirements on the parents, someone born to a U.S. citizen parent generally becomes a U.S. citizen without regard to whether the birth takes place in Canada, the Canal Zone, or the continental United States.

(Excerpt) Read more at harvardlawreview.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: naturalborncitizen; nikkihaley; tulsigabbard
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-202 next last
To: Electric Graffiti

.
Congress does not have the power to make anyone a “natural born citizen.”


21 posted on 10/20/2018 2:23:44 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

No court is ever going to rule that someone who was born a citizen is not a “natural born citizen”. The only real question about Obama was whether he was born outside of the USA, because the law the time required the citizen parent to have lived in the USA for five years after reaching the age of 18, which his mother had not done. That law was passed to prevent the children of young soldiers from claiming citizenship and has since been changed. But the idea that SCOTUS will rule there is a third kind of citizen who is born a citizen but not a NBC is delusional.


22 posted on 10/20/2018 2:23:58 PM PDT by Hugin ("Not one step from his weapons should a traveler take"...Havamal 38)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: dp0622

In another two decades “natural born” will mean born anything other than “white”, and born only to parents for whom English was a second language. They’ve already muddied the waters by retreating from the Constitution which clearly states both parents of a candidate for the presidency are required to be naturalized American citizens, meaning both parents were legally born on American soil. It doesn’t state any restrictions on where the eligible parents were currently residing when the candidate was born. That’s a false flag. The Constitution doesn’t acknowledge “anchor babies”, or legal immigrants, so the left now is trying to ram “court decisions” and “precedent” down everyone’s throat. Which is all leftist codswallop designed to mislead generations of Americans who were dis-educated in government schools for decades beginning in the 60’s and who have no idea that the qualifications for candidate for the presidency are vastly different than the qualifications for American citizenship. Americans on the street are abysmally ignorant on this issue. That’s why articles like this are floated by the left and taken seriously. Deliberate knowledge gap.


24 posted on 10/20/2018 2:25:13 PM PDT by 4Runner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: faithhopecharity
‘.....merely being an American citizen, or an American citizen at birth, does NOT make one a ‘natural born citizen’....

Yeah, it never stopped the 0panzy.
0panzy set the bar now. All you need is a forged BC from HI

26 posted on 10/20/2018 2:25:41 PM PDT by redshawk (0pansy is a Liar and Hates.........he just hates!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

“”arguments that a U.S. citizen at birth is somehow not constitutionally eligible to serve as President simply because he was delivered at a hospital abroad.””

I don’t believe that was the argument where obozo was concerned but was added just in case the readers/voters couldn’t think for themselves.


27 posted on 10/20/2018 2:27:40 PM PDT by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Runner

Great post.

I’m no wiz at how federal court cases to make “precedent” are handled.

I assume, though, that they can be sent up the ladder to the SCOTUS?

Which is already and will soon be Absolutely in conservative hands.

Will that slow the tide?


28 posted on 10/20/2018 2:28:11 PM PDT by dp0622 (The Left should know if Trump is kicked out of office, it is WAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck
Note that native born is not the same as natural born. Native born simply refers to the place of one’s birth, i.e., of one’s nativity. The term does not speak to the legal circumstances of a birth, merely to its location.

How do we know that this statement is correct? Is it in the Constitution? (No). Could this language be in a statute or in naturalization regulations? I don't know, but I haven't seen it. I have seen it repeatedly on Free Republic, but never with a source.

29 posted on 10/20/2018 2:29:31 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Electric Graffiti

The 14th ammendment.

If the parents entered legally (”under the authority”) then the child is born a citizen.


30 posted on 10/20/2018 2:30:21 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

See the above. The author of the citizenship clause of the 14th was crystal clear. Was not to include foreigners or aliens.

So again, where’s the law that congress has passed making children born to foreign nationals U.S. citizens at birth?


31 posted on 10/20/2018 2:32:45 PM PDT by Electric Graffiti (Jeff Sessions IS the insurance policy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: dp0622

.
Don’t hold your breath!

(remember the Obamacare ‘mandate !’


32 posted on 10/20/2018 2:32:50 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Electric Graffiti
Read the amendment.
33 posted on 10/20/2018 2:33:35 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I don’t remember what bottle I drank yesterday :)

What was the mandate?


34 posted on 10/20/2018 2:33:58 PM PDT by dp0622 (The Left should know if Trump is kicked out of office, it is WAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

This article was widely discussed leading up to the 2016 election which is how I came to find it and read it. It probably had a link in a post within a thread.

This article did not cite a court decision because there is none, but I believe that it does represent the opinion of the vast majority of the judiciary. The article does not address the other issue with the term Natural Born Citizen, to wit: Anchor babies. Children born within the borders of the United States are U.S. Citizens at birth (except children of the diplomatic corps) and are not required to undertake naturalization proceedings.


35 posted on 10/20/2018 2:36:08 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I gave you the author and his meaning. Not some court perverted meaning of it.

The question is, why are you perpetuating the lie?


36 posted on 10/20/2018 2:36:13 PM PDT by Electric Graffiti (Jeff Sessions IS the insurance policy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dp0622

.
The mandate that John Roberts declared a ‘Tax.’


37 posted on 10/20/2018 2:36:34 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck
Why does the Constitution speak of “citizens” and separately of “natural born citizens”? Why is the word “natural” inserted? It is a matter of allegiance.

It is a 'term of law' from that era. Obviously they did not wish naturalized citizens to be eligible for president. Beyond that, opinions differ.

38 posted on 10/20/2018 2:37:52 PM PDT by Jack Black (See my profile for Muller vs.Trump scorecard and other analysis of various anon claims.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Electric Graffiti

I don’t care what you think you gave!

I’m talking about the actual text of the amendment, which is the sole authority.


39 posted on 10/20/2018 2:38:31 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Ah, yes.

Well, let’s hope we have a REAL solid conservative SCOTUS now.

We’ve still got at least one to replace.

And yes, when it comes to saving the country, I hope Ginsberg gets sicker as hell as fast as hell.

..spit...


40 posted on 10/20/2018 2:39:02 PM PDT by dp0622 (The Left should know if Trump is kicked out of office, it is WAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-202 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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