Replies

Seems to me that the term Natural Born Citizen plainly means that you were born in the United States of America.

Not necessarily.

Although some of the early comments on natural born citizenship equate the term simply with being born in America, others equate the term with "born a citizen."

And the first Congress immediately passed a law which said that children born abroad to US citizens were natural born citizens, too.

This could be interpreted a couple of ways. One way is that our early leaders (which included James Madison, the Father of the Constitution) believed they had the power to define which persons born outside of US soil were natural born citizens as well.

The other is that they already believed they were, and passed a law simply to clarify that.

Yes, it is natural, normal and usual to be born in the country where your parents have citizenship. If your parents are citizens of the U.S.A., then it is natural, normal and usual for you to be born in the U.S.A. Why? Because it is natural, it is normal, it is usual for citizens of a nation to live and conduct their daily living routines, in the country of which they are citizens. It is outside of the natural, normal or usual for citizen to live in a country where they are not a citizen. It is also, natural, normal or usual for a child to be of the same citizenship as their parent. To separate a child from their parents’ citizenship(s) is inconsiderate of the family bond of citizenship. Obama is not a natural born U.S. citizen because he was born with dual citizenship. It is not normal, natural or usual for the son of Obama’s father to be a citizen of a country of which his father is not a citizen. Nor would it be normal, natural or usual for him to not also have his mother’s citizenship. His parentage is a double bind and while as an adult he can declare one citizenship over the other, he will always have a citizenship tie to his father’s citizenship country which is why he is not a natural born citizen, as it is not normal or usual for a son of his father to not be a citizen of his father’s homeland.

No, it “plainly means” one who is born as a citizen. As opposed to someone who, later in life, goes through a “natiralization” process.

Do you mean to say that an ambassador’s child born in anothet country can not become president?

Seems to me that the term Natural Born Citizen plainly means that you were born in the United States of America.
Was Cruz really born in Canada?
******************************************
From what I’ve read in various places, his parents were residents in the USA and were in Canada on a business trip when Ted was born. ...Thus, he was born subject to the jurisdiction of the USA though not on US soil and his mother was a US citizen; father a dry-foot Cuban.

Same applied to McCain and to all children born in foreign countries when a US citizen parent is deployed there in a diplomatic or military role.

Likewise, Bronco Bama’s father was a Kenyan-British citizen and his mother a US citizen. ....Precedent was set.

"Seems to me that the term Natural Born Citizen plainly means that you were born in the United States of America."

Do you honestly believe that the framers intended for foreign royalty to be eligible not only to the thrones of their fathers (parents) foreign country but also the Commander in Chief of our country?

The current reigning King of Thailand was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States 1927. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej#Early_life

If simply being born in the U.S. is enough to be considered a "natural born Citizen", then the current Dauphin of France (as considered by the Legitimists) Prince Louis Duke of Burgundy would be considered POTUS eligible.

French Royal Family
Legitimist

Prince Louis was born in New York City, 2010. Yet, his father is a French and Spanish citizen (but not a U.S. citizen) and his mother is Venezuelan.

If the French decided to have another restoration of the House of Burbon, the King of France would be considered POTUS eligible.
Or, if Louis Alphonse were to be elected POTUS 1st...and then the French decided to restore the crown...wow!

Imagine that. The King of France and the President of the U.S. as one in the same.

Clearly an offense to the founding generation.