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

To: Non-Sequitur
That's two forms of citizenship, not three. Two. Citizen at birth and natural born citizen are one and the same, and if Obama and McCain meet the legal definition of citizen at birth - which they do - then they are eligible to be president.

So, anyone born outside the country, but by law a citizen at birth, is what? Naturalized or natural born? The 14th amendment does not cover that situation, does it? It only covers "born or naturalized in the United States", not born outside the US but still a "Citizen at birth".

Logically those folks could be considered "naturalized at birth", because Congress only has the power to "Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization", not to define Constitutional terms, such as "Natural born citizen".

If that is true, then McCain was "naturalized at birth", and not a "natural born citizen". For Obama it depends on just where he was born. If born in Hawaii as claimed, he would be natural born (if one accepts that the 14th amendment tweaked the definition of that term a little). If not, then he is not a citizen at all, let alone a natural born one, unless he was later naturalized, in which case he'd still not be natural born.

So it all hinges on his place of birth. IMHO of course.

85 posted on 12/11/2008 6:23:24 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato

You said:

“(if one accepts that the 14th amendment tweaked the definition of that term a little). “

___

There is absolutely no historical context as to the 14th Amendment being written to change or override Article II - Section 1 of our Constitution. Absolutely none.

Historically it was written purely in the context of defining a citizen. There is a historical difference between the term citizen and natural born citizen that Leo’s argument clearly documents.


87 posted on 12/11/2008 6:30:58 PM PST by TheBigIf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

To: El Gato
So, anyone born outside the country, but by law a citizen at birth, is what? Naturalized or natural born? The 14th amendment does not cover that situation, does it? It only covers "born or naturalized in the United States", not born outside the US but still a "Citizen at birth".

A citzen at birth, just as the law says.

Logically those folks could be considered "naturalized at birth", because Congress only has the power to "Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization", not to define Constitutional terms, such as "Natural born citizen".

No. Logically Congress has to define who is a natural born citizen. Otherwise how do they identify those who need to be naturalized as citizens? Especially since the Constitution does not define the term. If it did then we wouldn't be having this conversation. And the only logical conclusion to your position is that there are as many definitions of natural born citizen as there are people caring to define it. That is an unworkable situation.

So it all hinges on his place of birth. IMHO of course.

In Obama's case, yes it does. It always has. For McCain, there is no question on his natural born status. He is a natural born U.S. citizen.

130 posted on 12/12/2008 4:46:57 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | 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