I quoted St. George Tucker about how OUR nation got formed.
St. George Tucker, was in the Revolutionary War and rose to the rank of Colonel. He communicated regularly with members of Congress and was appointed to the Virginia Court by President James Madison.
He's also the guy who just helped us fight off the government concerning the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
St. George Tucker, Northwestern University Law Review Largely forgotten today, Tucker returned to some legal prominence last Term, when the majority in District of Columbia v. Heller cited his annotated Blackstone’s Commentaries as proof that the Second Amendment had originally been understood as an individual right to arms.
-------
I'm not sure there's an actual law that defines "natural-born subject."
The English statute of 11 & 12 Will. III (1700)
Okay. There's a 'notwithstanding their father or mother were aliens,"....' line concerning inheritance.
Jus sanguines. That a Right of Blood.
It may be observed that, throughout that statute, persons born within the realm, although children of alien parents, were called "natural-born subjects."
Jus soli citizens, Right of Soil..... but we don't have a King, so I really don't see that power as material here.
-----
The problem is that I've been looking at the eligibility evidence for 5 years now, and yes, I've pretty much drawn my own conclusions quite some time ago.
I truly appreciate your candor. I've been at it for a bit over a decade, though I admittedly floundered a couple of those by trying to start with the US Codes. Hoooo-boy!
I get so wrapped up reading through old books and through the Library of Congress, I now refer to it as DHO - Doing Hard-time Online...cause I look up and I've lost like 3 hours. LOL!
Like I said, enjoying the heck out of the conversation here. As long as its kept HONEST. That's my biggest concern.
Vattel, The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law, Book 1, Chapter 20, § 240
Right. Tucker was quoting Vattel's description of how a certain kind of nation--a federal republic--gets formed, in describing the purpose of the 10th Amendment. Indeed, in the Law of Nations, Vattel spends a bunch of time talking about what a nation is, the different kinds of nations, how they are formed, and so on. Nevertheless, when he defined the "law of nations" in the very beginning, in the third paragraph, he says it's about the relations between nations. Make of that what you will.
Okay. There's a 'notwithstanding their father or mother were aliens,"....' line concerning inheritance.
Jus sanguines. That a Right of Blood.
Right. And it's explicitly ignoring that in calling them "natural-born subjects." They are natural-born subjects whether their parents were aliens or not.
Jus soli citizens, Right of Soil..... but we don't have a King, so I really don't see that power as material here.
Okay, let's review: I said it was too bad that rather than explicitly saying the president had to have two citizen parents if that's what they wanted, the Founders used an expression that sounded an awful lot like a term they would have known, one that explicitly did not have a jus soli requirement. You asked me to supply the English law that used that term, so I did. And now you say we don't have a King so why is it relevant.
The point is, they could have used any language they wanted to specify presidential eligibility. They could easily have written "no person except the offspring of two citizens." But they didn't. With full knowledge that someone could be a "natural-born subject" even if they had alien parents, they chose the term "natural-born citizen." That just seems like a really unfortunate choice, if they meant what you say they meant.
Assuming 'ou' in French means and operates the same as an 'or' in English.
This is not an either 'or', it's a refining 'or'.
Yes, but I'm not sure what your point is. He's saying "Les naturels, also called indigenes..."
I've been at it for a bit over a decade,
What made you start paying attention to it that long ago?