Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: James Thomas; All
Hold the phone there!

The very first Congress and President Washington addressed, and changed, the definition of "natural born citizen" (yes, that phrase) via the "Naturalization Act of 1790." Moving beyond the Birther movement's obsession with Vital, they specifically included children of American citizens born abroad or on the high sea.

Tell me again by what authority Congress cannot define who does and who does not meet the criteria of native or natural born citizen.

Further, since this piece brought up George Romney it must be made crystal clear he was never eligible for Mexican citizenship. Mexican law in place then forbade children of foreign nationals from birthright citizenship. He was only ever an American born of two American citizen parents.

Why are those same people challenging Romney based on George's birth not asking about Santorum's eligibility? His father was Italy born.

11 posted on 02/15/2012 10:25:52 PM PST by newzjunkey (Santorum has baggage too. Demand an inspection!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: newzjunkey

“The very first Congress and President Washington addressed, and changed, the definition of “natural born citizen” (yes, that phrase) via the “Naturalization Act of 1790.” Moving beyond the Birther movement’s obsession with Vital, they specifically included children of American citizens born abroad or on the high sea.”

“Naturalization Act of 1790.” was repealed by the Naturalization Act of 1795. You must keep current!

Congress can not change the Constitution by itself.

Constitution of the United States
Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.


14 posted on 02/15/2012 11:20:28 PM PST by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey; faucetman; James Thomas; DiogenesLamp
"Tell me again by what authority Congress cannot define who does and who does not meet the criteria of native or natural born citizen."

Certainly: Natural Law. Natural born citizens need no statutory act of man to make them citizens. They simply are, by virtue of their being born on native soil to parents who are themselves citizens. How could they not be natural born citizens? Other citizens, even persons who are declared citizens via statute such as the 14th Amendment, are made so via legalities. Natural born citizens need no such contrivances. Again, they simply are.

Congress has no "authority" to usurp Natural Law. Simple logic, here.

19 posted on 02/16/2012 12:54:00 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey
Tell me again by what authority Congress cannot define who does and who does not meet the criteria of native or natural born citizen.

The 10th amendment makes it clear that Congress has only those powers granted by the Constitution. Where does the Constitution grant Congress the power to define the terms of the "contract"?

That "definition" was only law for a few years, when Congress repassed that law, they left it out. But even when it was in force it said such persons "shall be considered as natural born Citizens" Current law defines them only as citizens. Why did they leave it out in the subsequent acts? Could it be because someone pointed out that they had no power to redefine the term? But in the end it doesn't matter. It's no longer the law.

20 posted on 02/16/2012 1:10:59 AM PST by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey
Why are those same people challenging Romney based on George's birth not asking about Santorum's eligibility?

Who's challenging Mitt' eligibility? No one here, he was born in the US of parents who were citizens.

You realize that by citing the 1790 act, it shows that prior to the act, when the Constitution was written, such persons born of citizens outside US jurisdiction were not considered natural born? Else why bother with the law? Since the Constitution came first, the definitions when it was written are what count, unless it has been amended to change them.

As long as Santorum's parents were citizens when he was born, and he was born in the US (and possible outside it if one of them was in the service of the country serving outside of it) then he's good to go. \

21 posted on 02/16/2012 1:16:26 AM PST by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey
The very first Congress and President Washington addressed, and changed, the definition of "natural born citizen" (yes, that phrase) via the "Naturalization Act of 1790." Moving beyond the Birther movement's obsession with Vital, they specifically included children of American citizens born abroad or on the high sea.
And that Act was repealed and replaced with another Act a few years later.

Tell me again by what authority Congress cannot define who does and who does not meet the criteria of native or natural born citizen.
Congress can do that. However, it takes an Amendment to the Constitution, as noted in the article. Such attempts have failed to date.

The spider loves the fly who wonders into its web and time has delivered the fly unto the spider.

39 posted on 02/16/2012 10:12:30 AM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson