“..one needs to be born on U.S. soil to two parents who at that time are already U.S. citizens. “
I’ve tried to find this language in the U.S. Constitution, I’ve found nothing in the Constitution to support this. If anyone has found this in the Constitution, feel free to cut and paste.
I’ve tried to find this language in U.S. Law, I’ve found nothing in the the law that says this. If anyone has found this in U.S. law, feel free to cut and paste.
I’ve seen some folks stacking a bunch of court decisions to try and support this (if Case A means this, then Case B must mean this, which means Case C would mean this, and Case D dah, dah, dah).
I’ve found no court decision that says a person must be born to U.S. citizens to be considered a natural born citizen.
It would be nice if U.S. law, or the Constitution did say this, but it doesn’t look like this language exists in the law or the Constitution
“..one needs to be born on U.S. soil to two parents who at that time are already U.S. citizens. “
I’ve tried to find this language in the U.S. Constitution, I’ve found nothing in the Constitution to support this. If anyone has found this in the Constitution, feel free to cut and paste.
I’ve tried to find this language in U.S. Law, I’ve found nothing in the the law that says this. If anyone has found this in U.S. law, feel free to cut and paste.
I’ve seen some folks stacking a bunch of court decisions to try and support this (if Case A means this, then Case B must mean this, which means Case C would mean this, and Case D dah, dah, dah).
I’ve found no court decision that says a person must be born to U.S. citizens to be considered a natural born citizen.
It would be nice if U.S. law, or the Constitution did say this, but it doesn’t look like this language exists in the law or the Constitution
Freeper “South Dakota” posted the below summary several weeks ago. I don’t know how to contact to ask permission, so I hope SD doesn’t mind if I re-post here.
Excellent summary of the NBC conundrum, with case reference:
In Minor v. Happersett (1875), the Supreme Court defined two classes of persons. The first class consists of children born in the United States, of U.S.-citizen parents. The second class consists of all other U.S.-born children, regardless of their parents’ citizenship. The Court used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to members of the first class. Regarding members of the second class, the Court doubted they were even citizens, let alone natural born citizens. In the Court’s opinion, natural born citizens are “distinguished from” aliens or foreigners, suggesting that a natural born citizen is someone who is not a “foreigner” (foreign citizen) at birth [05].
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the Supreme Court, reversing prior precedent, ruled that, under some circumstances, children born in the United States, of non-U.S.-citizen parents, acquire U.S. citizenship at birth. But, to this day, the Supreme Court has never ruled that such children are natural born citizens. On the contrary, our nation’s highest court has consistently used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to persons born on U.S. soil, to U.S.-citizen parents.
The U.S. Constitution was not provided with a glossary. The word “liberty” is not defined in the Constitution. The founders and framers understood what the words terms they carefully chose meant. As did most of the American electorate who through their votes and states approved it. Only the modern Progressive/Marxist language manipulators following the teachings of the Italian Communist linguist Antonio Gramsci over the last 100 years have succeeded in muddying the water of the words and terms in our U.S. Constitution for the purpose of replacing our Constitutional Republic with a Socialist/Marxist governed nation following also the Cloward-Piven Strategy too.
See the legal treatise on Principles of Natural Law by Vattel - Vol.1, Chapter 19, Section 212, which the founders and framers used to write the founding documents and a literal source for some of their ideas, words, and terms: https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/
See the holding in the Minor v Happersett (1874) U.S. Supreme Court unanimous decision for their stating what a “natural born Citizen” was without a doubt: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/88/162/
See this site for more history of how the nbC term got into the presidential eligibility clause and why: https://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html
And of course I suggest you read my White Paper, all of it for more help to you in understanding the original intent, meaning, and understanding of the “natural born Citizen” term: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
ProtectOurLiberty.org