Replies

How could the FFs have meant this alternate definition when there was no discussion or documentation to support it? If they didn't discuss it, that means that it was understood, and for that understanding you must look to English Common law. Under that law, a person born of two citizen parents, or a citizen father, outside the country was considered natural born. But a person born in the country was natural born regardless of the citizenship of the parents, although there exceptions such as the children of foreign diplomats, or of an occupying army. But any statute law changes to this definition only apply to citizenship at birth, not to natural born citizenship as that term is used in the Constitution. Congress cannot define terms in the Constitution, except by passing an amendment.

But "natural born" only matters in eligibility to the office of President and Vice President. For all other purposes, citizen at birth, naturalized citizen and natural born citizen all have the same rights and obligations, and all are eligible for any other office, unless state law or Constitutions provide otherwise for state or local offices,although I'm not aware that any do.

"If they didn't discuss it, that means that it was understood"

I would agree with that.

"and for that understanding you must look to English Common law."

Perhaps, but I have yet to see a clear citation of common law that differs from the dictionary definition. Oxford even cites Blackstone when it provides the definition.

"Under that law, a person born of two citizen parents, or a citizen father, outside the country was considered natural born. But a person born in the country was natural born regardless of the citizenship of the parents, although there exceptions such as the children of foreign diplomats, or of an occupying army."

With you so far.

"But any statute law changes to this definition only apply to citizenship at birth, not to natural born citizenship as that term is used in the Constitution. Congress cannot define terms in the Constitution, except by passing an amendment."

I don't think you can retroactively redefine a word by statute, so if that is the correct interpretation of your comment, I agree. The Legislature cannot redefine 'natural born' ala Resolution 511, but a Constitutional Amendment could alter the wording (but not really the definition of the original terms) of the requirements to be President. So Resolution 511, aside from being nonbinding, is also irrelevant.

"But 'natural born' only matters in eligibility to the office of President and Vice President. For all other purposes, citizen at birth, naturalized citizen and natural born citizen all have the same rights and obligations, and all are eligible for any other office, unless state law or Constitutions provide otherwise for state or local offices,although I'm not aware that any do. "

I agree. It seems that we agree on this matter. So, since every single person seems to have a slightly different view on this, the question is where do we not agree?