Nice try but incorrect. The act established the United States citizenship of certain children of citizens, born abroad, without the need for naturalization. In other words, they were US citizens, at, by and since their birth. As such, they were never naturalized or needed naturalization. But don't take my word for it, lets reread the actual text:
"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".
Also, no requirement for two citizens parents.
"Shall be considered as" did not mean that they are!
See my post 245 directly below yours. The ambiguous language was repealed and corrected by the 1795 Naturalization Act (An act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject)
Sess. II, Chap. 19, 20; 1 stat 414.
3rd Congress; January 29, 1795.
"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".
Also, no requirement for two citizens parents.
Earlier, on December 29, 1794, Madison had expressed the opinion that Congress had no naturalization authority over American citizens: “It was only granted to them to admit aliens.”132 The following Monday, January 5, 1795, “Mr. Madison . . . reported a new bill of Naturalization, containing the amendments recommitted, and also whatever was necessary from the Old Law, so that the latter should be entirely superceded.”133 Madison salvaged the “Old Law” provision that granted naturalization rights to children of American citizens born abroad.134 Interestingly, the phrase “natural born” was deleted without any recorded debate on the issue.135 The new statute provided in pertinent part that “the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.”136 The law established that the alien child was only naturalized, not declared a natural born citizen.137
[the emphasis is mine]
“Nice try but incorrect. The act established the United States citizenship of certain children of citizens, born abroad, without the need for naturalization. In other words, they were US citizens, at, by and since their birth.”
What part of the “Naturalization Act f 1790” did you fail to read and understand? The “Naturalization” in the title tells you it takes a person who is alien born and makes the person a naturalized citizen by the authority of the unnatural statutory naturalization law. Furthermore, you are once again ignoring the fact that in the absence of a naturalization law that provided naturalized citizenship for a child born abroad with two U.S. citizen parents, much less only one U.S. citizen parent, did not become a U.S. citizen at all of any kind. That historical fact makes it quite impossible for you to misconstrue who is and is not naturalized. If a child born abroad with two U.S. citizen parents was a natural born citizen in 1812, the U.S. Supreme Court could not have decided they were not U.S. citizens. The historical fact that the U.S. Supreme Court did decide such children were not U.S. citizens at all is proof beyond any possible doubt that such children were not natural born citizens and were not naturalized citizens until a naturalization law was finally enacted to grant them naturalized citizenship.
” As such, they were never naturalized or needed naturalization. But don’t take my word for it, lets reread the actual text:”
You obviously can keep on repeating the lie ad infinitum to your hearts content, but the historical fact that such children were not U.S. citizens for many decades until a naturalization law was enacted for the specific purpose of naturalizing them.
“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”.
Yes, and that very quotation says such children are naturalized citizens 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”.
“Also, no requirement for two citizens parents.”
On the contrary, the quotation says “citizens”, the plural form, and not citizen, the singular form.