Replies

In fact about the only relevant case law on NBC was against a Chinese American and the court used the word “Natural Born” to define the Chinese American a natural born even though both his parents were foriegn born and not US citizens at his birth.

I've read the decision and unless I misunderstood something (quite possible) it never specifically said he was NBC, although it did say he was a citizen at birth. I believe citizen at birth = native born, making for two groups of citizens: native born/natural born/citizen at birth and naturalized. A subset of the birthers believes there are three categories: citizen at birth with a subset of these being natural born, and naturalized. I know of absolutely nothing in US case law that would point to this three category conclusion.

Interestingly, at the time his parents were not only not citizens, as Chinese they were ineligible to be naturalized. If I remember right, he also spent some considerable portion of his childhood in China.

One of the dissenters in the case said that ruling him to be a citizen would open the presidency to a "coolie." (The horror.) But I don't believe the ruling itself said any such thing.

Sherman,

Look at the entire text.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/169/649/case.html

You will find this passage, which is most often quoted by legal theorists.

Here the Justices refer to English Common Law to define what a “natural born citizen” is and explicitly say that the reason they refer to English Common Law is that “we do not have US Common Law”

124 U.S. 124 U. S. 478.

II. The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called “ligealty,” “obedience,” “faith,” or “power” of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King’s allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual — as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem — and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects.

DISCLAIMER: I really really wish that Congress would explicitly define this and kill the “anchor baby” option. However, till that happens, this case law prevails.

Thanks,

Software Engineer