"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The intent and purpose of the (14th) amendment was to provide equal citizenship to all Americans either born on U.S. soil or naturalized therein and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It does not grant “natural born Citizen” status. It only confers “citizen” status, as that is the exact word used by the Amendment itself and that is the same word that appears in Article I, II, III, and IV of the Constitution. It just conveys the status of “citizen,” and as we learned from how the Framers handled the Naturalization Acts of 1790 and 1795, being a “citizen” does not necessarily mean that one is a “natural born Citizen.”
The Fourteenth Amendment only tells us who may become members of the community called the United States, i.e., those born on U.S. soil or naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are U.S. citizens. The amendment was needed because under Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856), slaves and their descendents, whether free or not, were not considered as being members of that community even though born on U.S. soil and unlike the American Indians subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the amendment only allowed these slaves and their descendents to become a member of the U.S. community by making them U.S. citizens. Once those persons or anybody else (e.g. Wong Kim Ark) so became a member of the U.S. community (became a U.S. citizen by birth on U.S. soil or through naturalization), then that person could join with another U.S. citizen and procreate a child on U.S. soil who would then be an Article II "natural born Citizen."
Hence, during the Founding, the original citizens created the new Constitutional Republic. Through Article II’s grandfather clause, they were allowed to be President. Their posterity would be the "natural born Citizens" who would perpetuate the new nation and its values. These “natural born Citizens,” born after the adoption of the Constitution, would be the future Presidents.
Subsequently, a “natural born Citizen” was created by someone first becoming a member of the United States (a U.S. citizen) by birth on its soil to a mother and father who were U.S. citizens or if not so born then through naturalization, and then joining with another similarly created U.S. citizen to procreate a child on U.S. soil. The product of that union would be an Article II “natural born Citizen.”
After the Fourteenth Amendment, it became sufficient to be a citizen if one were merely born on U.S. soil or naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. That U.S. citizen would then procreate with another similarly created U.S citizen and produce a “natural born Citizen.”
As we can see, becoming a U.S. citizen is only the first step in the process of creating a “natural born Citizen.” The second step is the two U.S citizens procreating a child on U.S. soil. It is these “natural born Citizens” who can someday be President or Vice President of the United States. Stated differently, a President must be a second generation American citizen by both U.S. citizen parents. A Senator or Representative can be a first generation American citizen by naturalization or birth. It is the extra generation carried by a President which assures the American people that he/she is born with attachment and allegiance only to the United States.
Now, let’s take a look at the Godfather of the 14th amendment and see what he had to say about “born a citizen” vs “natural born citizen” –
Rep. John Bingham, Principal Framer of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
During a debate (see pg. 2791) regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen. Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:
"As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth." (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872.)
Notice that Bingham declares Houard to be a “natural-born citizen” by citing two factors – born of citizen parents in the US.
John Bingham, aka “father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins. Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor:
"All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians." - (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)
Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:
"Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen...." - (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866)
According to Justice Black, Bingham’s words uttered on the floor of the House are the most reliable source. Bingham made three statements, none of them challenged on the Floor, which indicate that a natural born citizen is a person born on US soil to parents who were US citizens.
And of course we’ve all heard the Supreme Court has never ruled on or defined what a “natural born citizen” is, but that is a folly –
You can't say that the 14th did overturn Dred Scott and other pro-slavery rulings and then claim that the 14th does not apply to ALL forms of citizenship.
The 14th clearly does apply to all Citizens.
Of course, there are only TWO classes of Citizenship:
Natural Born or Naturalized!
It is ignorant, silly fantasy to claim otherwise.
Again, name ONE legal expert who agrees with you, please?
Again, name ONE elected official who agrees with you, please?
That there is no doubt that a person born on US Soil of Citizen parents is a Natural Born Citizen is NOT at issue with me or with any of the posts you relentlessly post.
Your obvious error, for any thinking, reasonable person is this: NOT ONCE HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO SHOW THAT THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO OBTAIN NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP STATUS!
That the Citizenship of the parents is noted is logical, as that would be the first consideration with someone NOT born on United States Soil.
Again, name ONE expert who agrees with your crack pot theory, would you?
JUST ONE?
American Center for Law and Justice? NOPE
Landmark Legal Foundation? NOPE
Jay Sekulow? NOPE
Mark Levin? NOPE
Heritage Foundation? NOPE
You have NOBODY on your side who really knows what he or she is talking about.
All you have are people who do not understand English, logic or the law.
(By the way, again, slick, you want to quote Congressmen when the 14th was written or adopted, yet you DISMISS the role of our entire, CURRENT Congress, in interpreting Constitutional issues? Again, you have all the classic signs of a liberal. You change the rules and the importance of institutions and individuals to suit your current purpose!)
True conservatives are have every right to be irritated by the arrogance and stubbornness of the radical birthers. You waste way too much of our energy and time.
Show us ONE current member of Congress who agrees with you, that someone MUST have American Citizen Parents at the time of Birth, if born on United States soil?
(Besides which, It is pretty obvious that Marco Rubio’s parents, anticommunist as the were, OWED NO ALLEGIANCE TO COMMUNIST CUBA, they were refugees, seeking allegiance with the United States!)