Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers

We are discussing the US Constitution, not England. Since the King is not elected there is no parallel point.

I asked you, why does the Constitution draw a distiction between “citizen” and “natural born”? I posted what a US Supreme Court Justice wrote in a majority opinion. Do you doubt that Vattel was a source for the founders? Is it your assertion they were merely sloppy when they used NBC for the President, but only citizen for senators and representatives?


53 posted on 05/10/2011 2:03:41 PM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]


To: MileHi

“Do you doubt that Vattel was a source for the founders? Is it your assertion they were merely sloppy when they used NBC for the President, but only citizen for senators and representatives?”

Vattel was not a source for citizenship laws. Vattel argued it all followed the father, which has never been US law. We have followed the English example and used birthplace.

A naturalized citizen has every right except this - he cannot run fro President.


60 posted on 05/10/2011 3:11:33 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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