[Yosemitest]

It makes PERFECT SENSE.
YOU just DON'T AGREE with it !


Take a long look at our 1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives who voted and PASSED The Naturalization Act of 1790.
Let's read it , too !

United States Congress, "An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" (March 26, 1790).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled,
That any Alien being a free white person,
who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years,
may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States
wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least,
and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court  that
he is a person of good character,
and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law
to support the Constitution of the United States,
which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer,
and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon;
and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. 


And the children of such person so naturalized,
dwelling within the United States,
being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization,
shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. 

And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States,
shall be considered as natural born Citizens: 
Provided, that
the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: 
Provided also, that
no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid,
except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

Now think about that.
MANY of our FOUNDING FATHERS were members of the 1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives,
who voted and PASSED The Naturalization Act of 1790.
Then later in history in 1802, when the The Naturalization Act of 1790
was repealed and replaced, some of our FOUNDING FATHERS who were still members of Congress RESTORED the basic provisions of the original 1790 law AGAIN,

except for the period of residency before naturalization.
The residency requirement, that is, the amount of time the immigrant had to reside, or live, in the United States, was put back to five years, as it had been in 1795.

After Jefferson became president (in 1801), the 1798 naturalization law was repealed, or overturned (in 1802).
Also Notice the signature blocks at the bottom of this:



1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives

SO THINK ABOUT THAT ... LONG AND HARD.
It IS THE LAW, whether you like it or not !
Now, for your statement:

"but it is a mistake
and you have to face the most basic fact here
... citizen ≠ natural born citizen
... everyone knows it,
everyone has always known it, "

You could NOT be MORE WRONG, even if you tried !
VERY FEW PEOPLE believe that.
Only those recently out of the public education system believe that garbage, because that what the teachers' union has pushed.
Our children today ARE NOT TAUGHT OUR HISTORY, let alone the struggles our FOUNDING FATHERS went through to make our country was it WAS !
We must return to our FOUNDING, and we must do it soon!

Now read this, because very, very few people believe the garbage coming out of the LAME STREAM MEDIA today !
More and more, people are looking up the FACTS and the LAW for themselves.

On the Meaning of "Natural Born Citizen",
MAR 11, 2015, Commentary by Neal Katyal & Paul Clement

... While the field of candidates for the next presidential election is still taking shape,
at least one potential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz, was born in a Canadian hospital to a U.S. citizen mother.^15×
15. See Monica Langley, Ted Cruz, Invoking Reagan, Angers GOP Colleagues But Wins Fans Elsewhere, Wall St. J. (Apr. 18, 2014, 11:36 PM), http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303873604579494001552603692.
Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a "natural born Citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution.
Indeed, because his father had also been resident in the United States, Senator Cruz would have been a "natural born Citizen" even under the Naturalization Act of 1790.
Similarly, in 2008, one of the two major party candidates for President, Senator John McCain, was born outside the United States on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to a U.S. citizen parent.^16×
16. See Michael Dobbs, John McCain's Birthplace, Wash. Post: Fact Checker (May 20, 2008, 6:00 AM), http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/05/john_mccains_birthplace.html [http://perma.cc/5DKV-C7VE].
Despite a few spurious suggestions to the contrary, there is no serious question that Senator McCain was fully eligible to serve as President,
wholly apart from any murky debate about the precise sovereign status of the Panama Canal Zone at the time of Senator McCain's birth.^17×
17. See, e.g., Laurence H. Tribe & Theodore B. Olson, Opinion Letter, Presidents and Citizenship, 2 J.L. 509 (2012).
Indeed, this aspect of Senator McCain's candidacy was a source of bipartisan accord.
The U.S. Senate unanimously agreed that Senator McCain was eligible for the presidency,
resolving that any interpretation of the natural born citizenship clause as limited to those born within the United States was "inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the 'natural born Citizen' clause of the Constitution of the United States,
as evidenced by the First Congress's own statute defining the term 'natural born Citizen.' "^18×
18. S. Res. 511, 110th Cong. (2008).
And for the same reasons, both Senator Barry Goldwater and Governor George Romney were eligible to serve as President although neither was born within a state.
Senator Goldwater was born in Arizona before its statehood and was the Republican Party's presidential nominee in 1964,^19×
19. See Bart Barnes, Barry Goldwater, GOP Hero, Dies, Wash. Post, May 30, 1998, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/may98/goldwater30.htm [http://perma.cc/K2MG-3PZL].
and Governor Romney was born in Mexico to U.S. citizen parents and unsuccessfully pursued the Republican nomination for President in 1968.^20×
20. See David E. Rosenbaum, George Romney Dies at 88; A Leading G.O.P. Figure, N.Y. Times, July 27, 1995, http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/27/obituaries/george-romney-dies-at-88-a-leading-gop-figure.html.

There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle.
The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better.
Fortunately, the Constitution is refreshingly clear on these eligibility issues.
To serve, an individual must be at least thirty-five years old and a "natural born Citizen."
Thirty-four and a half is not enough and, for better or worse, a naturalized citizen cannot serve.
But as Congress has recognized since the Founding, a person born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is generally a U.S. citizen from birth with no need for naturalization.
And the phrase "natural born Citizen" in the Constitution encompasses all such citizens from birth.
Thus, an individual born to a U.S. citizen parent - - whether in California or Canada or the Canal Zone - - is a U.S. citizen from birth
and is fully eligible to serve as President if the people so choose.



---



* Paul and Patricia Saunders Professor of Law, Georgetown University.
** Distinguished Lecturer in Law, Georgetown University; Partner, Bancroft PLLC.

[Democratic-Republican]

See post #132 please.

[Democratic-Republican]

My FRiend Yosemitest, wow, just wow. You are something else. I said this ...

"but it is a mistake and you have to face the most basic fact here ...

citizen ≠ natural born citizen

... everyone knows it, everyone has always known it, "

To which you replied ...

You could NOT be MORE WRONG, even if you tried !
VERY FEW PEOPLE believe that.

You are a special case. I've seen dedication but this takes the cake. Apparently everyone for 228 years were mistaken and you figured it all out now.

I even showed you that Madison himself struck the NBC portion of the 1790 law that you continue to post, and he even warned that people might do exactly what you are doing, right here, right now!

Okay, that makes you a higher than authority than the main man himself. LOL! A person who makes a mistake can be honorable and admit it and then correct it. Other types just carry on as if it never happened.

I'm quite sure now that others have seen enough to be convinced of where the arguments of merit lie and where the arguments of tangled spaghetti are.