Replies

Founders/Framers, okay pedant, totally different people right?

Not totally, but largely. The Framers were a youthful group. At the founding many would have been minors or just past the age of majority. The Framing era produced the Articles of Confederation. Citizenship law was State law, and there were thirteen different flavors.

The hell they didn’t! They SPECIFICALLY wrote into the Constitution the requirement for President “Natural born Citizen”.

Natural born connotes "at birth." It is taken directly from English law. Even when you have no idea what you are talking about, you say it with great birther conviction.

BIRTHER SCORECARD (last updated 2015)

https://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/birther%20case%20list.pdf

Original decisions, total cases: 226
Birther wins: 0

Total appellate court rulings: 120+
Birther wins: 0

Total supreme court rulings: 35
Birther wins: 0

All the courts are wrong and only you know the trufe.

Without resorting to the 70+ years and more later revisionist reinterpretation by jurists who were not privy to the construction and adoption of the UnitedStates Constitution, WILL YOU PLEASE coherently answer WHY the Founders found it necessary to distinguish between natural born Citizens and just anyone born here?

I answered your question. It was not the Founders, it was the Framers, and they did not distinguish as you claim. They distinguished citizens at birth from aliens at birth. You don't like the answer. Take your drivel to court. Maybe the three hundredth time will be the charm.

Wong Kim Ark at 169 U.S. 662-63:

In United States v. Rhodes (1866), Mr. Justice Swayne, sitting in the Circuit Court, said: "All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. . . . We find no warrant for the opinion that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution."