[Munz]

I agree 100% but if a non binding resolution is all we have to start with, it should be more than enough to jump start this mess.

Also there is this law from the first congress session 2 chapter 4 of 1790 which states:

“the children of citizens of the United States, that may have been born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as NATURAL BORN CITIZENS: Provided also That no person heretofore proscribed by any state, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an act of the legislature of the state in which such person was proscribed.”

March 26, 1790

[Non-Sequitur]

I agree 100% but if a non binding resolution is all we have to start with, it should be more than enough to jump start this mess.

Except S.Res.511 didn't claim to define natural born citizen under all circumstances. It just said that under the laws in place at the time, the conditions of McCain's birth made him a natural born citizen.

So if the Senate passed a non-binding resolution stating that Obama was a natural born citizen would you accept that?

[Non-Sequitur]

Also there is this law from the first congress session 2 chapter 4 of 1790 which states...

Which was superseded by another law in 1795...and dozens of times since.

[null and void]

Said law was superseded in 1795.

The 1795 law eliminates any reference to natural born citizen.

No law since has defined ‘natural born citizen’