[rxsid]

Of course, the Naturalization Act of 1790 was repealed by the Act of 1795 (which did NOT attempt to define or extend the definition for NBC). What the 1st Congress had tried to do in 1790 was to EXTEND the known definition (of born in country to citizen parentS) to those born outside of sovereign territory, to citizen parentS. Of course, they can't do that. That is, use their Constitutional powers for creating laws on Naturalization to modify the meaning of the term "Natural Born Citizen." Congress (by itself) doesn't have the Constitutional authority to modify or define (or EXTEND) the Constitutional term "Natural Born Citizen." Only a SCOTUS decision on the intent of the framers, or an amendment to the Constitution can do that.

[patlin]

I have been reading through some of Madison’s later papers and it is quite astonishing how many American citizens at the time of the revolution went abroad after the war and remained there. Some raised their children there and then the children would come to the US at their coming of age and it was a cause of great strain as with them came the political views of these feudal governments. Thus, since 1795, any child born abroad to US citizens and who's parents do not return to the US to raise the child and educate them here are accountable to follow US immigration laws. The children on the coming of age must take an oath to the the US & Constitution and renounce any allegiance to the country they were raised in before they are allowed a passport. Atleast that is the way the law is supposed to work, that is until the late 60’s and the exploding progressive movement's usurpation of it.

[bushpilot1]

Please see El Gato’s post 20 this thread.

The founders translated sujects naturels to natural born subjects.

This clearly means they understood naturels to mean natural born.

We are wasting time on Hawaii, WND and Tim Adams. It matters not where Obama was born. His father is an alien.

Naturels means natural born not natural according to the Founders.