[xzins]

The following is the text of the Naturalization Act of 1790 passed by the US Congress:

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.

So, I repeat: If we're going to use the 18th century understanding of "natural born citizen", then we need to use no more restrictiveness to attain "natural born citizenship" than was used at that same time.

Since the Constitution was completed in 1787, then the first law dealing with naturalization that would have had the same understanding would have been the Naturalization Act of 1790.

[Perdogg]

The law 1790 is immaterial. Both Jindal and Rubio were born in the US. If the founding fathers were interested in applying the two parentage clause to nbC, then they would have included it. It would have required only four to six words. However, having sid that, the 14th Amendment made this moot.

[Perdogg]

I want to make one point. I enjoy reading and responding to your post eventhough we do not always agree. However, we probably agree about 90% of the time.

Having said that, I wanted to be clear that my belief on Rubio’s or Jindal’s status does not absolve 0bama of any duplicity in his own birth record. If 0bama is discovered to have been born in Hawaii to parents who are not ambassadors or enemy combandants, then I would say he is nbC. I will be applying the standard to all, which it should.

However, if facts bear our different information, then I will be on a the ‘birther’ bandwagon.