[TNTNT]

John Bingham??? Can you find someone who at least was breathing in the last century. If that is your best answer, I now understand why birthers have lost over 80 cases. My favorite justice on SCOTUS is Scalia who has stated on several occasions that last thing he looks to when trying to interpret a statute is to look at legislative intent. Realistically, if the the birthers wish to gain any traction for their pet issue, they are going to have to get someone, a Representative or Senator, with authority to issue subpoenas and hold hearings, to push the issue. Otherwise, it will never become more than spam on the internet.

[browniexyz]

If the “2-parent” issue is, as you say, “bogus,” then why haven’t we seen Obama’s birth, adoption, and educational records? Because the issue of whether he is an NBC isn’t “bogus”!!!!!!

[rxsid]

Yes, John Bingham!!! He's a heck of a lot more credible on this issue than anyone "breathing in the last century."

John Bingham, "father" of the 14th Amendment, the abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln's assassins, REAFFIRMED the definition known to the framers by reiterating Vattel's definition...not once, but TWICE during Congressional discussions of Citizenship pertaining to the upcoming 14th Amendment!

Vattel's definition for "natural born citizen" was read into the Congressional Record during the Civil War.

"All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians." (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)).

 

Vattel's definition for "natural born citizen" was read into the Congressional Record after the Civil War.

“every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))"

The text of non binding Senate resolution 511 on McCain's status:

"Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen' clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress's own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen';"

The resolution of 2008, and the first Congress's Naturalization Act of 1790 Both referred to two citizen parents. The first Congress tried to extend NBC status to children born, to citizen parentS, overseas. Congress doesn't have that authority, only for naturalization. So, it was repealed by the act of 1795.

Vattel's definition is stated in the dicta of a number of SCOTUS cases as well, even though those cases had nothing to do with the intent of NBC and POTUS eligibility (thus the reason the definition, well known to the justices, appears in the dicta). The definition is well known, except by revisionist historians and progressive globalists.

One can't be a "Natural Born Citizen" and have multiple alligiences owed at birth.

Don't be an after-birther tool.