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

To: TNTNT
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 So, it was repealed by the act of 1795.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.

170 posted on 01/01/2011 2:43:58 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: rxsid
Well according to my favorite SCOTUS Justice, Scalia, Bingham’s opinion is no more credible than yours or mine. In fact his would probably have less credibility according to Scalia since a congressman speaking on behalf of passing legislation is likely to say anything to pass said legislation. I put much less credibility to Vattel than I give Wong Kim Ark and its 1000 plus case progeny.

The reason the Senate Resolution refers both of McCain's parents being citizens is because McCain was not born within the sovereign territory of the USA, but rather in the Panama Canal Zone which was the sovereign territory of Panama. It that fact which caused the inclusion of that language. Obama’s fact situation is completely different, and frankly I would think it rather embarrassing for birthers to try and make an analogy between the two different situations.

177 posted on 01/01/2011 4:36:00 PM PST by TNTNT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | 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