Posted on 12/16/2022 4:02:55 PM PST by CDR Kerchner
(Dec. 15, 2022) — What if your humble servant were to reveal something here at The P&E which could, once and for all, put an end to “natural born Citizen” (“nbC”) debate raging in the comments sections of numerous posts here? What if recently-discovered “hard” evidence – in the form of a letter from John Jay to David Brearley, Chairman of the “Committee on Postponed Matters” at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 – was produced? And what if that letter confirmed the intent of the Founders to rely on § 212 of Emmerich de Vattel’s treatise The Law of Nations for its definition of an nbC, requiring birth in the nation to parents who were already U.S. Citizens? Would that change any of the minds of those who believe that the only criterion for an nbC is to be born here as a “citizen at birth” or a “citizen by birth?” Curious? Read on. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
(has put the USA onto an ever accelerating path of destruction of our Constitutional Republic)
And the fruit 🍓🍑 of such labors is now quite apparent.
But far too few listened...
The Immigration Act of 1790 directly defines Natural Born citizen as being born of citizen parents, with citizenship devolving from the father.
“The Immigration Act of 1790 directly defines Natural Born citizen as being born of citizen parents, with citizenship devolving from the father.
So a NBC has to be born beyond the sea?
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 .
“So a NBC has to be born beyond the sea?”
Where do you get the “has to be born” beyond the sea?
A baby born of parents in the military stationed overseas are know as natural born citizens.
“Where do you get the “has to be born” beyond the sea?”
I gave you a direct quote from the Act.
“What if I told you...”
Sounds like a damn push poll....
The Congress’ first naturalization law, 1790 Act Naturalization Act, was found to be in error by key founders and framers such as Madison and thus on their instigation was totally repealed and replaced by the 1795 Naturalization Act which corrected the errors. No naturalization law since the 1790 erroneous one has ever mentioned the term “natural born Citizen” as Congress has no power under the U.S. Constitution or the laws of nature and Natural Law to create a “natural born Citizen”.
You evidently cannot read.
“But far too few listened...”
They...were...too...comfortable.
The Congress’ first naturalization law, 1790 Act Naturalization Act, was found to be in error by key founders and framers such as Madison and thus on their instigation was totally repealed and replaced by the 1795 Naturalization Act which corrected the errors. The words “natural born” were deleted in the 1795 Act. No naturalization law since the 1790 erroneous one has ever mentioned the term “natural born Citizen” as Congress has no power under the U.S. Constitution or the laws of nature and Natural Law to create a “natural born Citizen”.
“You evidently cannot read.”
I posted the text. It is very clear. That is the only definition of NBC in the Act.
You make statements but you have not backed up those statements.
“...as Congress has no power under the U.S. Constitution or the laws of nature and Natural Law to create a “natural born Citizen”.””
I have no clue as to what that means.
My point is that the term natural born is defined in the act. The framers put it in the Constitution as one of three requirements to be president of the United States, so it has pivotal meaning.
“So a NBC has to be born beyond the sea?”
That is the statement I responded to.
Since being a natural born citizen was one of the three requirements to be president placed into the Constitution, do you really think that the framers of the Constitution intended that only people born beyond the sea would be president? That is utterly ridiculous.
No, you can’t read.
“Since being a natural born citizen was one of the three requirements to be president placed into the Constitution, do you really think that the framers of the Constitution intended that only people born beyond the sea would be president? That is utterly ridiculous.”
You referenced that definition, not me. Stop the theatrics
“My point is that the term natural born is defined in the act. “
I quote it for you again:
——————born beyond Sea,————
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 .
G W MORON drove the country into the ground. Obama aka barry soetero fundamentally transformed this country. Everything changed with his usurpation.
“The Immigration Act of 1790 directly defines Natural Born citizen as being born of citizen parents, with citizenship devolving from the father.’
No, Both parents have to be citizens AND the father must have RESIDED in the US.
I would love to say that Obama was pulling the strings today.
When Obama was in office he did NOTHING. When he tried anything, he failed. I don’t think he would be more successful today?
No they are not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.