Posted on 08/09/2024 9:34:27 AM PDT by CDR Kerchner
(Aug. 9, 2024) — First, let us put on our thinking hat and do some simple grammatical analysis of the two terms ‘Citizen at Birth’ (“CAB”) and ‘natural born Citizen’ (“nbC”).
The first term, “CAB”, tells the reader simply WHEN the person became a Citizen, i.e., at birth.
The second term, “nbC”, tells the reader two things, i.e., WHEN the person became a Citizen, i.e., when born, and also HOW they became a Citizen, i.e., by what type of law the person became a Citizen –- Man-made laws, acts, treaties, amendments, Positive Law(s), or the Law(s) of Nature, Natural Law. The ‘natural born Citizen’ obtains their citizenship by the clear-cut natural law circumstances of their birth, with the birth being in the country and being born to two U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized Citizen) parents, via the Laws of Nature, Natural Law. No man-made law or act is needed to grant them their U.S. citizenship. ... . . . Second, for some basic logic and logical analysis of the “CAB” and “nbC” terms using set and subsets, see this Euler Diagram logic. Euler Diagram analysis is used to test the truth or fallacy of an argument. In this case the fallacy of the argument that the terms ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘Citizen at Birth” are logically identically equal is clearly disproved. The ‘natural born Citizen’ kind of Citizen is the largest subset of Citizens at Birth. The terms are NOT identically equal. Again, adjectives mean something. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Why don`t they just ask families who have been here since 1620? ...As if people are actually stupid or something? My family knows exactly what the terms mean. We been here since 1620.. These people are idiots...
Oh, really? Remember that library book George Washington failed to return? That just happened to be Law if Nations by Vittel. It was used to form the Union and spells this all out. Of course the GOP brought it up because obama wasn’t eligible. That’s why he had to cut and paste his BC. That’s why Hawaii had to enact a vexatious requester law and close all BCs to even the family who’s child, Virginia, died who strangely had the same registration number as obama. That’s why Nancy had to reword the Hawaiian DNC certification. That’s why he was never vetted, oops. FYI, he was on the committee to define the term and signed his name to the 2 US citizen parents requirement.
Again, it has to do with loyalty. If Xi’s gf popped out a baby on US soil would he/she be loyal to the US or to mom and dad’s homeland?
Obama pretty much eliminated the reason for a discussion or debate.
Then they’re not anchor babies. Research the term.
“Trump needs to end birthright citizenship.”
I don’t think he can do that. The Indian tribal exception is primarily territorial based.
“Report on the Effect of the 14th Amendment Upon Indian Tribes”
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/on-this-day-in-1924-all-indians-made-united-states-citizens
to the contrary:
“all noncitizen Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States be, and they are hereby, declared to be citizens of the United States: Provided that the granting of such citizenship shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of any Indian to tribal or other property.”
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/on-this-day-in-1924-all-indians-made-united-states-citizens
I regard the 1862 Bingham quote as definitive, but this makes for interesting reading:
https://www.kamalaharrisineligible.com/
If that is true, Kamala Harris (aka Barack Obama) will have no problem taking this question right on up to SCOTUS for their ruling. With both sides agreeing to abide by the Court’s ruling, come what may. What says s/he?
This guy gets it. Huge difference between Citizen at Birth and Natural Born Citizen.
But no one cares.... “diversity” is the national religion thanks to LBJ and drunkard Ted Kennedy, and if that means trashing the constitution then so be it.
Didn’t read the article per FR’s unwritten rule, huh? Skipped that day in HS Civics class? Got through life without knowing it?
Sigh, here goes. Being born on US soil or a child of a military person being born on “US soil” on base makes you a US citizen. Being an immigrant and going through the legal process will legally give you citizenship. However, the founding fathers took it up a notch for POTUS from Vattel’s Law of Nations which are laws based on England, France, Germany, etc. A Natural Born Citizen requires the person to be born on US soil and have both parents being US citizens no matter which way they got their citizenship prior to the kid’s birth.
BTW, Obama signed his name to the 2 parent bit but he was never vetted...
This extra special requirement has to do with loyalty. If Xi’s gf were to come to the US to birth their baby would he/she be loyal to the US or to mama and daddy’s homeland? Would you want to take the chance in the voting booth? As loyal to the US as Trump’s kids are, the only one who is eligible for POTUS is Tiffany because Ivana and Melania didn’t have US citizenship at the time of the babies’ births.
I regard every person born under the flag of the United States of a parent subject to its laws that respects the laws (and court system if applicable) of the US to be a US citizen.
If mommy or daddy is a lawbreaker (or fails to make a court appearance) and any domestic government agent abets in the lawbreaking, then any offspring would not qualify for birthright citizenship.
If you would have read the entire article you would have learned the answer to your question. Naturalization as a basic “Citizen” kind of Citizen at birth is granted via U.S. man-made naturalization law Title 8 Section 1401 enacted under the naturalization powers granted to Congress in the U.S. Constitution: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1401&num=0&edition=prelim
Naturalization as a basic “Citizen” kind of Citizen at birth is granted via U.S. man-made naturalization law Title 8 Section 1401 enacted under the naturalization powers granted to Congress in the U.S. Constitution: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1401&num=0&edition=prelim
Naturalization as a basic “Citizen” kind of Citizen at birth is granted via U.S. man-made naturalization law Title 8 Section 1401 enacted under the naturalization powers granted to Congress in the U.S. Constitution: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1401&num=0&edition=prelim
Quotable Quotes re Citizenship Kinds, Allegiance, and The Presidential Eligibility Clause in The United States Constitution: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2024/06/14/quotable-quotes-re-citizenship-kinds-allegiance-and-the-presidential-eligibility-clause-in-the-united-states-constitution/
“The Constitution enumerates the EXCLUSIVE authority over immigration to Congress.”
Yes it does, but natural born does not pertain to immigration, it pertains to the kind of citizenship. Did you read the article?
And, no, the Congress cannot overrule the Constitutional requirements to be president. Has nothing to do with immigration.
“The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)”
EMMERICH DE VATTEL
Ҥ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”
https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/
Natural born was also defined in British statutes of 1709 and 1730.
-PJ
It is written in the Kenyan Parliament that he was born there.
His Kenyan grandma also said he was born in Kenya.
Obama Sr.’s college friends were shocked at finding out that guy running for POTUS was any relation to Sr. In “Remembrances”, they wrote they never knew anything about Stanley Ann much less a baby. The only guy in college around that time who claimed to know was good ‘ol one term Hawaiian Governor “I was there” Abercrombie but even he failed, after promising, to find the birth certificate but claimed there was something on a paper somewhere that he wouldn’t show.
“It is most true that this Court will not take jurisdiction if it should not: but it is equally true, that it must take jurisdiction if it should. The judiciary cannot, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the constitution. We cannot pass it by because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, we must decide it, if it be brought before us. We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given, than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution. Questions may occur which we would gladly avoid; but we cannot avoid them. All we can do is, to exercise our best judgment, and conscientiously to perform our duty. In doing this, on the present occasion, we find this tribunal invested with appellate jurisdiction in all cases arising under the constitution and laws of the United States. We find no exception to this grant, and we cannot insert one.” Source: Chief Justice John Marshall, 1821, U.S. Supreme Court case Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264.
Trump cannot do that on his own
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.