Posted on 03/12/2015 12:32:49 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
You might be in love with policies and procedures, but anyone cognizant of the real world understands the fallacy of "we've always done it that way" doesn't actually change reality.
That is how it is working now, but this occurrence of a stupid and apathetic electorate is relatively recent. I'm sure the vast majority of voters just assume that anyone getting on the ballot is eligible, and they don't really think about it much. I suspect they think "Officials" will make sure no ineligible candidates get on the ballot, just the same as the mail gets delivered and the trash gets picked up. We really do live in a very disconnected society.
AFAIK, not one state has done so. If GOP state legislators won't take this rather minor step, what makes you think individual Secretaries of State, without cover of such a law, will take it upon themselves to demand such proof?
You must have totally missed (ignored?) my Roger Calero example.
Ex post facto law. These laws which didn't exist in 1787 are now being retroactively applied to a term which did exist in 1787, and as a result, they change it's meaning at the whim of Congress. Somehow I don't believe that is how this was intended to work.
If the answer is that the person is entitled to be a US citizen as a result of the circumstances of his birth, then he is Natural Born.
And if Congress passes a law tomorrow which says "anyone named "Steve" will be an American citizen when they are born", Cynwoody will authoritatively explain to all of us that hese new Steves are now "natural born citizens" too.
Do you not grasp the absurdity of Congress being able to modify a constitutional term at whim?
You seem unclear on the concept. Let me give you that quote from the Supreme Court again. (Wong Kim Ark.)
A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized,...by authority of Congress, exercised ... by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens...
Now if your command of English is sufficient, you can see how this sentence explicitly spells out that this is "naturalization" at birth.
Well first of all, it is a "NATURALIZATION" act. It says so in the title. Secondly, it says " "shall be considered as natural born citizens".
"Shall be considered as" does not mean "is." Do I need to get Bill Clinton to explain to you the definition of "Is"?
If Natural Born Citizen is a dollar bill, the "naturalization act of 1790 just declared your four quarters as equal to it... but that didn't make it the same thing.
And he points to the rule book yet again. Geeze, do you never bother to try thinking for yourself? We all don't need to be good little Nazi soldiers, we can weigh facts for our selves. We don't need "Experts" (More like procedure bound idiots) telling us what to think. We can reason it out.
Can't you?
How is it my error? I was not alive in 1790 and I did not vote on the Naturalization Act of 1790.
Adhering to the rule of law, what a concept!
If the Act had said: shall be considered as naturalized citizens, you’d have a point, but since it didn’t say that...you have no point.
The Act excluded from needing naturalization “the children of citizens who may be born beyond the sea or out of the jurisdiction of the United States.”
natural born citizennor confer it to anyone.
Roger Calero ran for President twice. He got <10,000 votes either time. Which means keeping him off the ballot was more or less unnecessary.
What I’m talking about is a candidate with heavy support. Disqualifying him would be unpopular and promptly lead to court battles.
Unless I’m confused, no state has in the last six years passed laws specifying particular methods for a candidate to register proof of his being qualified according to the Constitution.
If you have evidence of such laws, I’d like to see it.
As I’ve said elsewhere, the NBC requirement, while I would honor it, provides no benefit to the American people. We have tens of million of impeccably NB citizens who hate America. The notion than a NBC would be inherently more loyal has been comprehensively disproven.
Is English your primary language? I mean no offense but you seem to have difficulty with it.
Yes, I’m a natural born citizen/Citizen of the United States At Birth! No offense taken.
A natural born citizen is a citizen at birth, a citizen at birth is not necessarily a natural born citizen.
A simply analogy:
A Ford is a car, a car is not necessarily a Ford.
The topic under discussion in that particular post was The Naturalization Act of 1790 and its provision that “The children of citizens that may be born beyond the sea or out of the jurisdiction of the United States shall be considered as Natural Born Citizens.”
You know, folks like Panama Canal Zone-born Senator John McCain or Mitt Romney’s father, Governor George Romney who was born in Chihuahua, Mexico.
See if you can find any judge or any member of Congress in America who believes that.
Tisdale v. Obama, U.S. District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.: “It is well settled that those born within the United States are natural born citizens.”— Tisdale v. Obama, U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, January 23, 2012.
Voeltz v. Obama, Judge Terry P. Lewis, Leon County, Florida Circuit Court Judge: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion.”—June 29, 2012
Swensson, Powell, Farrar and Welden v Obama, Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili, State of Georgia Administrative Hearings: “For the purposes of this analysis, the Court considered that Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Ankeny, he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen. Accordingly, President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary under O.C.G.A. under Section 21-2-5(b). February 3, 2012
Allen v Obama, Arizona Superior Court Judge Richard E. Gordon: “Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”—Pima County Superior Court, Tuscon, Arizona, March 7, 2012
Here’s an act of Congress that defined citizenship in the United States At Birth.
Civil Rights Act of 1866
“The Civil Rights Act of 1866, 14 Stat. 27-30, enacted April 9, 1866, was the first United States federal law to define U.S. citizenship and affirmed that all citizens were equally protected by the law. It was mainly intended to protect the civil rights of African-Americans, in the wake of the American Civil War. This legislation was enacted by Congress in 1865 but vetoed by President Andrew Johnson. In April 1866 Congress again passed the bill. Although Johnson again vetoed it, a two-thirds majority in each house overcame the veto and the bill therefore became law.
Formally titled “An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their vindication”, the Act declared that people born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power are entitled to be citizens, without regard to race, color, or previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude. A similar provision (called the Citizenship Clause) was written a few months later into the proposed Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
“The distinction between citizenship by birth and citizenship by naturalization is clearly marked in the provisions of the constitution...” - Elk v Wilkins
“A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory, or by authority of congress, exercised either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens by proceedings in the judicial tribunals, as in the ordinary provisions of the naturalization acts.” – U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark
8 U.S.C. § 1401
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/III/I/1401
A codification of naturalization statutes. What is your point?
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.