The Natural Born Citizen Clause as Originally Understood

Catholic University Law Review ^ | 2015 | Mary Brigid McManamon

[Yashcheritsiy]

The concluding statement in the article:

"The introduction to this Article posed a question: “in the eyes of early Americans, would someone born in a foreign country of American parents be a ‘natural born citizen’ and therefore eligible to be President of the United States?” The pertinent historical materials lead to only one conclusion: aside from children born to U.S. ambassadors or soldiers in hostile armies, the answer is “no.”"

[Yashcheritsiy]

I urge anyone who actually cares about what the Constitution means on this issue to take the time to read the article all the way through (it should be a free download in PDF format).

It seems like EVERYBODY who talks about this does so from the starting point of trying to "prove" or "disprove" that one candidate or another is a natural born citizen.

That is COMPLETELY the wrong approach to take. Don't assume a premise and then try to force evidence to support you. Start with ALL the evidence and then let it lead where it will. Whether the evidence supports or doesn't support your chosen candidate is NOT what is important.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Only people born of illegal immigrants who sneak over the border to bear them are natural born citizens. Ask Obola. He’ll tell you.

[Lurkinanloomin]

One is NATURALLY a US citizen when one cannot be anything else.
Born here of citizen parents.
Natural born citizen.

[freedomjusticeruleoflaw]

Which is what I did with Obama years ago, concluding at that time that he was NOT natural born because his father was a Kenyan WITH NO INTENTION OF EVER BECOMING A U.S. Citizen. His birthplace could not have mattered less.
Cruz- not eligible
Rubio- not eligible
Obama- not eligible
McCain- arguably not eligible
Romney- arguably not eligible

[Dalberg-Acton]

I understand it to mean born in any of the several united States to parents who are both citizens of the United States.

[Aria]

100% correct.

[freedomjusticeruleoflaw]

Nailed it.

[JoSixChip]

Oh come on, every one knows that cruz, the harvard educated constitutional lawyer/expert, knows the constitution better then those who wrote it in the first place.

[MrEdd]

McCain doesn’t belong with the others in any way shape or form.

As much as I despise him as a person and as a politician, both of his parents are citizens and he was born in the Canal Zone on what was at that time American soil.

He was never eligible for Panamanian citizenship, only American citizenship.
Attempting to leave out the U.S. territorial nature of the Canal Zone is dishonest.

[Johnny B.]

The very first Immigration law (1790) clearly states that children of U.S. citizens born abroad are NBC. It does require that a foreign-born father have been a resident

This law was passed by many of the same men who wrote the Constitution. HERE is the relevant law. Amd here is the clause that the very first Congress (including many of the authors of the Constitution) said about foreign-born children [emphasis added]:

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

Cruz's was an NBC, and his father did reside in the U.S.

[piytar]

I’m nominally a Trumpster, but this is going nowhere, is getting old, and makes us look stupid.

If the courts wouldn’t touch this issue with respect to Obama, they won’t touch it with respect to Cruz. Well, unless it can be used to help get Hillary in office. All this Idiocy does is help that effort!

Also, it’s just plain wrong. According to this argument, a direct ancestor of George Washington and John Hancock would not be a “natural born citizen” if he or she was born (for example prematurely) while the parents were on vacation in Europe. Ridiculous.

Please just stop.

PS There are actual statutes passed within Congress’ legitimate Consititional powers that say Cruz is natural born. The courts regularly uphold statutes that aren’t passed within those powers, so they aren’t about to touch these.

[Johnny B.]

"Cruz's was an NBC" should read "Cruz's mother was an NBC".

[odawg]

There has been a new innovation in how to amend the Constitution and/or make it say what you want it to say.

It only requires one to post in very large font using a number of exclamation marks.

The Constitution will shortly be amended, I predict.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Actually, you need to read the article then, esp. starting at pp. 332. The author makes an excellent case that the 1790 naturalisation law did exactly the opposite of what you just said.

[bunkerhill7]

“Andrew Jackson was born on March 15, 1767, near Lancaster, South Carolina. His parents, Andrew and Elizabeth, along with his two older brothers, Hugh and Robert, emigrated from Ireland two years earlier.”
http://thehermitage.com/learn/andrew-jackson/orphan/

[dangus]

Ridiculous. The first Congress recognized as “natural-born” anyone born oversees to American citizens.

[piytar]

Oh, and as far as caring about the Constitution goes, who do you think would do more to uphold our rights under the Constitution: Cruz, Trump or Hillary (or shudder, Sanders)?!

My money is on Cruz or Trump.

But go ahead and keep pushing an issue that can only help Hillary or Sanders. (It nominally hurts Cruz, but not to any real extent. It definitely hurts Trump by making us Trump supporters look like lunatics and idiots.) Yeah, that will be good for the Constitution!

[gunnyg]

and as bobby blake usta say...and dat’s the name o’ dat tune!!!!!

Yeah!
*****

[Talisker]

The very first Immigration law (1790) clearly states that children of U.S. citizens born abroad are NBC. It does require that a foreign-born father have been a resident. This law was passed by many of the same men who wrote the Constitution. HERE is the relevant law. Amd here is the clause that the very first Congress (including many of the authors of the Constitution) said about foreign-born children [emphasis added]:

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.

Cruz's was an NBC, and his father did reside in the U.S.

Correct. Except that in the case of Cruz, his father resided in the US but I believe never became a US citizen. So the early law/concept boils down to the question of whether one citizen parent, in Cruz's case the mother, I'd enough to pass on NBC, or if both parents are necessary. Or, in the case of the time of the founders, it could only be passed on by a citizen father and not a citizen mother.

[GreyFriar]

Based upon your inclusion of McCain, I take it that your position is the children of members of the US military who are born in foreign countries, where their parents are living on active military duty, are NOT “natural born citizens”?

i.e., my oldest daughter, who was born in a US Army Hospital in Germany in the 1980s, while I was serving there in the 3rd Armored Division as an active duty officer, is NOT a natural born citizen?