Posted on 09/20/2025 9:15:05 AM PDT by CDR Kerchner
(Sep. 20, 2025) — Recently, I was advised by a fellow Texan, who supported an ineligible candidate for POTUS, that:
“In order for your argument to have any merit at all, you must provide evidence that the authors of the Constitution intended that there be some class of persons who are born a citizen but are not natural born citizens. You could do that from their writing or from legal sources at the time, but you must prove that precise point, or you might as well be clucking like a chicken.”
I wish to invite them and all other supporters of ineligible candidates to consider that this entire discussion boils down to linguistics and logic. Fortunately, both my parents were trained in linguistics and passed some of that knowledge on to me by traipsing our family all around the world. I proceeded to add to that by taking a handful of linguistics courses while in college and studying a number of foreign languages over the years, including English. ... finish reading the entire article via: https://www.thepostemail.com/2025/09/20/the-linguistic-and-logical-aspects-of-the-term-natural-born-citizen-by-andy-prior/
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
It is kind of a pointless argument since apparently nobody has standing to bring a lawsuit against a potentially invalid candidate except for the committee that nominated them in the first place.
There is no controlling legal authority on this.
And there’s disagreement about the facts of particular candidates for president.
For example, there is no dispute that Kamala Harris is a US citizen by birth. But some people question whether her parents were American citizens when she was born. Apparently if they were not citizens, she would not be considered a natural born citizen.
There are a number of issues with Barack Obama and his birth and citizenship. Some people dispute whether he was really born in Hawaii. Others talk about how even if he was born in Hawaii, his father was not a US citizen.
Ted Cruz was born in Canada, but his mother was an American citizen living in Canada.
By the strictest interpretation, which has never been ruled in court to my understanding, both of your parents should be American citizens at the time of your birth, and you should be born within the confines of the United States , in order to truly be a natural born citizen.
I’m just saying no one truly agrees on what natural born citizenship from the standpoint of running for president means. Even on Free Republic, there is no consensus among Freepers as to what it means.
A while back , I expressed the opinion that I’m happy that this Mamdami guy in New York can never run for president. Another Freeper said never know what a crazy court might decide about him......l
CDR K:
The author misattributes the term “natural-born citizen” to Vattel.
The term is not found in the original French. Multiple copies of which, by the way, were in the hands of the Continental Congress no later than 1775.
Rather, when we speak of Vattel’s work and the term “natural-born Citizen” the latter appears for the first time in the first English translation of the former, published circa 1792, IIRC.
NFN but nobody appears to have objected to that translation at the time it was published in the early 1790s.
The dog did not bark!
FWIW the term natural-born citizen was used by Adams in draft texts of the Treaty of Paris in the early 1780s. So it’s not as if that term was invented by Vattel’s translators in the early 1790s.
Finally: Talk of non-NBCs Rubio and/or Gabbard anywhere on the Pubbie ticket in 2028 is really becoming tiresome.
John Adam’s made sure that his pregnant wife got back to the U.S. from Europe to make sure their offspring was a natural born citizen.
Mark Levin NBC definition, offered on his radio broadcast circa 2013 to support his friend Ted Cruz (mind you, this definition is a paraphrase, but, even so, based on what he has said publicly, he can’t be heard to say that, in fact, or, practically speaking, he believes in a more restrictive definition):
NBC of the U.S.A.: Anyone born anywhere in the universe to any parents whatsoever except those of us who were born outside the United States to two non-U.S.A.-citizen parents.
Let your mind wander in terms of the dregs of global society who would qualify to run for or hold the office of POTUS under that definition.
“nobody has standing to bring a lawsuit against a potentially invalid candidate”
The determination of “having standing” has been fraudulently processed.
The founders and framers were fluent in French which was the diplomatic language of the founding and framing time frame and the clearly understood what Vattel’s defining sentence meant in English. That is why John Jay who became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court suggested that restrictive Natural Law term for the presidential eligibility clause via a letter in July 1787 to George Washington, who was the President of the Constitutional Convention.
Absolute Proof the Founders Knew and Accepted Vattel`s French “naturels” to mean “natural born” in American English Years Before U.S. Constitution Was Written: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2015/04/17/absolute-proof-the-founders-knew-and-accepted-vattels-french-naturels-to-mean-natural-born-before-constitution-was-written/
and
See: My Translation and Analysis of a Key Sentence in Emer de Vattel’s 1758 Treatise on Natural Law in Section 212 -“Des citoyens et naturels”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2023/04/15/my-translation-of-a-key-sentence-in-emer-de-vattels-1758-treatise-on-natural-law-in-section-212-des-citoyens-et-naturels/
and
The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term In Our United States Constitution: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf
Nowadays, what the US Constitution says is meaningless.
What matters is what the USSCOTUS says the Constitution says.
Another blast from the past, scholarly article about the constitutional Natural Law term “natural born Citizen” by John Greschak: What is a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.?: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/what-is-a-natural-born-citizen-of-the-u-s-by-john-greschak/
The last child of John and Abigail was stillborn in 1777.
Abigail didn’t join John overseas until 1784.
Not that John was unaware of the importance of being born on the soil of one’s country, but I can’t seem to find anything that documents what you’ve said.
In other news, did you know that you don’t have to have a driver’s license unless you are involved in commerce??? If you are just “traveling”, then the police do not have jurisdiction, and can not pull you over or, use their flashing lights! This is according to the Supreme Court! Plus, don’t consent to be tried in Admiralty Court, which is where the flags have fringe on them. Also, you don’t need no vehicle insurance or license plates!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WjKCGOWwuM&t=494s
As already noted, Abigail’s last pregnancy resulted in the stillborn birth of her and John’s daughter Elizabeth in 1777.
By the way, two of John Quincy Adams’ five children appear to have been born overseas:
____________
George Washington Adams (1801 - 1829) - He was born to his parents in Prussia and would be a source of grief to them. He became an alcoholic and drowned while traveling to help his father move from the White House back to Quincy, Massachusetts.
John Adams II (1803 - 1834) - He was extremely loyal to his father and always defended him. Once, he got into a fistfight on his behalf. After his father returned from the White House, the young Adams ran a flour mill that was owned by his father. During this time, his health declined, and he died. His father mourned his death and said of him, “A more honest soul, or more tender heart never breathed on the face of the earth.”
Infant Adams (1806) - Unknown cause of death. The baby was born and died the same day.
Charles Francis Adams Sr. (1807 - 1886) - He would serve in the House of Representatives under President Abraham Lincoln. He and his wife would have 7 children. His children would be the parents of most of the descendants that came from John Quincy Adams.
Louisa Catherine Adams (1811 - 1812) - She was born and died in Russia. She died of dysentery shortly after her first birthday. She is recognized as the first American citizen born in Russia.
____________
Fine points aside, I believe Barrack Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen based strictly on the fact that too much effort was expended to create the illusion that he is (therefore everyone involved in the cover-up ALSO believe he is not).
So, despite taking the Oath of Office and acting like the President he was actually a Resident (placemarker), and Joe Biden was legally in authority for those eight years.
But when Biden took the Oath, even as a Natural Born Citizen, he no longer had the authority because the stolen election made him a usurper. Since Harris doesn’t qualify as an NBC either the true President was - Nancy Pelosi!
This debate over the legitimacy of Biden’s master’s autopen dictates is rather piddling if one steps back and sees that everything signed by Obama and Biden (12 years of official business!) is technically moot because those men were not legitimately Presidents.
But for the sake of order and non-disruption we have to maintain the illusion that they were.
There is dispute about the citizenship status of Kamala Harris at birth.
The Student Visa "F" terms of the 1952 Immigration Act restricted the "domicile" of recipients to their home countries. Legally, citizenship is determined by the "domicile of origin" which means that Kamala Harris was born a citizen of Jamaica and India.
Additionally the "Asia Pacific Triangle" restriction within the 1952 Immigration act required "aliens born in the USA" to have to apply for a "quota" slot to receive citizenship within the USA, and the "quota" at that time was restricted to 100 per year.
Ask: How could a person required to register for a quota, be considered a "natural born" US citizen?
Answer: They can not!
That is why the parents of Kamala Harris committed immigration fraud, including changing her middle name in February 1965 and then covering up the chronology of their actions well into the 1980's.
The parents of Kamala Harris were not US citizens at the time of her birth on October 20, 1964. They did not apply to become permanent residents until the year 1967, and only her father became a US citizen many years later in October 1981.
Is there any mention in the Constitution of “being nominated”, “running”, or for that matter “presidential elections”?
State Legislatures govern the appointment of new Presidents. There is no requirement for uniformity of methods, although they all do use popular voting as their preferred method at this time.
The Florida 2000 result does suggest, however, that a popular vote election does not bind a Legislature. I think the main reason the USSC voted the way they did in Bush v. Gore was to avoid a Gore v. Florida Legislature case - because the Legislature would certainly have appointed Bush electors had the SCOFLA recounts produced a Gore majority.
Anyway, the NBC requirement can’t be used to contest the 51 popular vote elections that happen in November, since they have no Constitutional existence.
Correct, and the term natural born subject (which became natural born citizen in the 13 former colonies upon independence) is well defined in the Common Law per Blackstone.
You obviously have not read Andy Prior’s article where in he addresses the logical and linguistical errors, as well as historical errors, in what you assert about the constitutional Natural Law term, “natural born Citizen”.
I suggest you read Andy Prior’s excellent analysis essay again and pay particular attention to where he addresses your Blackstone common law argument. Here for your convenience is a link to the full article: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2025/09/19/the-linguistic-and-logical-aspects-of-the-term-natural-born-citizen-by-andy-prior/
The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term In Our United States Constitution: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf
The trouble is, the English language meaning of "Citizen" at that time meant "Townie." Someone who lives in a specific city, such as a "Londoner" was a "citizen" of London.
The English language as used at that time, did not use the word "citizen" to refer to a national. That usage is entirely Swiss French. Switzerland is the only place in the world that used "citizen" in the context of a national.
Now i've looked through Blackstone's complete works. I think you can find "citizen" in there four or five times, all in connection with "townfolk." I have found no examples of the usage of the word "citizen" corresponding to referencing what nation a person owed allegiance to. The word "Subject" is in there countless times, but "Citizen", only four or five.
The correct and proper word for an English national at the time was "Subject" and in France, it was "Sujet", which also means "Subject" in English.
Usage of the word "Citizen" to refer to a national appears to be completely unique to Switzerland.
So when the founders bastardized the meaning of "natural born citizen" by merging the English common law "natural born subject" with the Swiss "Citizen", it can only be presumed that they did so to make the concept seem familiar to the people who had been using "natural born subject" their entire lives.
But make no mistake. The usage of the word "Citizen" was deliberate, and it was intended to convey the Swiss concept of a free "Citizen" as befits a Republic, and not the vassal status of "Subject" as befits a Monarchy.
Therefore, the incorporation of the word "Citizen" shows it is intended to follow the Vattel definition in its meaning, while providing familiarity to the people who had been accustomed to using "natural born subject."
So, so wrongheaded.
Jefferson literally scratched out the term subject, with full prejudice, and wrote citizen right on top of it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.