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

To: MamaTexan

Your St. George Tucker reference started off with this:

“Prior to the adoption of the constitution, the people inhabiting the different states might be divided into two classes: natural born citizens, or those born within the state, and aliens, or such as were born out of it. The first, by their birth-right, became entitled to all the privileges of citizens; the second, were entitled to none, but such as were held out and given by the laws of the respective states prior to their emigration.

Then it goes all gobbledygook and very difficult to understand. But I don’t think it is important to understand because it talks about various state rules, etc.

The issue at hand is the United States Constitution and it’s declaration that only Natural Born Citizens are eligible for the office of president. Not interested in getting into each individual states laws and customs, the framers wanted someone who was physically born on U.S. soil, at least 35 years old and a resident for the previous 14 years – certainly enough time to be devoted to the country. That length of time would certainly satisfy Jay’s concern.

When coupled with all the other evidence available I am 100% convinced that this republic does not require citizen parents to be it’s president. See quoted reference to MamaTexas. http://www.uniset.ca/naty/maternity/9YJLH73.htm.


209 posted on 05/06/2012 7:42:04 AM PDT by New Jersey Realist (America: home of the free because of the brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies ]


To: New Jersey Realist
Then it goes all gobbledygook and very difficult to understand. But I don’t think it is important to understand because it talks about various state rules, etc.

LOL! States Sovereign RIGHTS, not 'rules'.

Here, another question presents itself: if the states, individually, possess the right of making denizens of aliens, can a person so made a denizen of a particular state, hold an office under the authority of such state? And I think it unquestionable that each state hath an absolute, and uncontrolable power over this subject, if disposed to exercise it. For every state must be presumed to be the exclusive judge of the qualifications of it's own officers and servants: for this is a part of their sovereignty which they can not be supposed to have intended ever to give up.

Also odd you have trouble with it since it's written in plain English.

-----

St. George Tucker, was in the Revolutionary War and rose to the rank of Colonel. He communicated regularly with members of Congress, a fact proven by doing a search here:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/hlawquery.htmlfor the exact phrase St. George Tucker, bring up ONE HUNDRED returns.

His Annotated version of Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England [of which the view of the Constitution is a part] was one of the reasons President Madison appointed him a Judge of the Virginia District Court, and his annotated Blackstone volumes are among the leather bound tomes found behind every practicing lawyer’s desk in the country.

So no, I don’t think there is much comparison between Tucker’s words and a googly-eyed professor because she ‘joined the Emory Law faculty’…………. in 1995

214 posted on 05/06/2012 8:03:36 AM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a ~Person~ as created by the Law of Nature, not a 'person' as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]

To: New Jersey Realist
“Not interested in getting into each individual states laws and customs”

You should be. Some of the states following Independence chose to follow the French model and did not confer citizenship upon the child born in the state with alien parents. Consequently the child was not a citizen at birth or after birth without reaching the age of majority and naturalizing as a citizen of the state and thereby the United States. Likewise, the states which conferred state and thereby U.S. citizenship upon a child born in the state with alien parents did so by the authority of a public law which made the child an unnatural born U.S. Citizen treated as if they are a natural born citizen in the same manner as described in the 18th Century Nationality Acts. Whenever reading a source which uses the term, “natural born citizen,” you have to keep in mind the usage was imprecise to the extent of which it fails to mention that it includes unnatural born citizens such as aliens naturalized after birth in some cases, aliens made as if natural born at birth by authority of Royal decree or legislative statute, and the true natural born citizen child in the state jurisdiction with citizen parents. The key issue determining the natural born subject or citizen status is whether or not the child is born with an obligation for allegiance to more than the sovereign or polity of the place of birth.

222 posted on 05/06/2012 8:32:18 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | 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