Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: bushpilot1

See the 1790 Act (passed by the first Congress); a person born outside the US but to two US citizens was considered a natural born citizen. Clearly against Vattel!


699 posted on 05/18/2010 3:53:52 PM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 694 | View Replies ]


To: PugetSoundSoldier

In 1790 could Obama be President?


705 posted on 05/18/2010 4:30:15 PM PDT by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 699 | View Replies ]

To: PugetSoundSoldier; Uncle Chip
See the 1790 Act (passed by the first Congress); a person born outside the US but to two US citizens was considered a natural born citizen. Clearly against Vattel!

Which Congress promptly removed in the next Naturalization Act of 1795 because legislation cannot change the meaning and intent of the Constitution. They fixed their error.

But here is what was said though,

"And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: . . . "

Here again, the father's citizenship via jus sanguinis is passed onto their child. And the wording should have been stronger than the word "considered". An unambiguous word to use, if Congress had no doubts, would be the word "are" in place of the word "considered". What was Obama's father again? That's right, he was Kenyan citizen and subject to Great Britain.

706 posted on 05/18/2010 4:49:30 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 699 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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