[Political Junkie Too]

Irrelevant. It was an anonymous statement not about the Constitution which did not then exist. If Scotus interprets the Constitution differently than some historical figure did, the Scotus version prevails.

Props to completely dismissing the diaries of the first Supreme Court Justice, the fourth President of the United States, and the first Secretary of the Treasury, who were actually in the room when this was being debated during the creation of the Constitution.

You bolded interesting passages from history, but could just as easily have other parts of the same quote to argue the other side.

From Tribe:

To be sure, those matters, when reliably ascertainable, might shed some light on otherwise ambiguous or perplexing words or phrases - by pointing us, as readers, toward the linguistic frame of reference within which the people to whom those words or phrases were addressed would have "translated" and thus understood them.

Tribe then adds "But such thoughts and beliefs can never substitute for what was in fact enacted as law." Just how comprehensive has the natural-born citizen issue been enacted as law? In some of your prior citations, I've seen "native born" substituted for "natural born," but they cannot be the same thing or the Justices would have used the same language.

From Aldridge v. Williams, 44 U.S. 9, 24 (1845)

we must gather their intention from the language there used, comparing it, when any ambiguity exists, with the laws upon the same subject and looking, if necessary, to the public history of the times in which it was passed.

From United States v Union Pacific Railroad Company, 91 U.S. 72 (1875)

But courts, in construing a statute, may with propriety recur to the history of the times when it was passed, and this is frequently necessary in order to ascertain the reason as well as the meaning of particular provisions in it.

In Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 254 (1901), did you just copy/pasted the same text from Aldridge v. Williams, 44 U.S. 9, 24 (1845) or did this case just rely on the same wording from the prior one?

On a personal note, I appreciate that you included both sides of the quotations and did not simply limit the wording to the part that you bolded.

Since you cited repeated mentions of the importance of words and their meaning at the time, what do you make of the inclusion of "natural born citizen" in Article II Section 1, but simply "citizen" in Article I Sections 2 and 3? I may be wrong in my assertion, but it appears that the citations you offered have reduced the phrase "natural born" to being superfluous, and that it offers no special distinction to offset the use of only "citizen" when creating Congress. Why do you think "natural born" was included if it offers no value to the office?

-PJ

[woodpusher]

Since you cited repeated mentions of the importance of words and their meaning at the time, what do you make of the inclusion of "natural born citizen" in Article II Section 1, but simply "citizen" in Article I Sections 2 and 3? I may be wrong in my assertion, but it appears that the citations you offered have reduced the phrase "natural born" to being superfluous, and that it offers no special distinction to offset the use of only "citizen" when creating Congress. Why do you think "natural born" was included if it offers no value to the office?

I actually stated the purpose of my cited and quoted court opinions as follows:

The purported intent of the lawgiver is irrelevant if the actual words of the law have a clear meaning. The words prevail even where the lawgiver's words are contrary to his intent. This is even so with legislation where the legislators voted to pass legislation. The words are ratified or passed into law, the intent is not.

Your observation that natural born citizen may connote no more than citizen is incorrect. Natural born citizen connotes one born a citizen, and excludes any citizen who was not born a citizen, but who acquired citizenship subsequent to birth; i.e. one of alien birth who later became a citizen.

It has nothing to do with when a child's parents acquired citizenship, if ever. Thus Chester Arthur, White Republican, was inaugurated Vice President, and later President, in 1881. Chester Arthur was born in 1829 and his father, William Arthur, was naturalized 31 August 1843.

Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 698, 716.

The Convention between the United States and China of 1894 provided that,

"Chinese laborers or Chinese of any other class, either permanently or temporarily residing in the United States, shall have for the protection of their persons and property all rights that are given by the laws of the United States to citizens of the most favored nation, excepting the right to become naturalized citizens."

28 Stat. 111. And it has since been decided, by the same judge who held this appellee to be a citizen of the United States by virtue of his birth therein, that a native of China of the Mongolian race could not be admitted to citizenship under the naturalization laws. In re Gee Hop (1895), 71 Fed.Rep. 274.

The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in the declaration that

"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,"

contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization. Citizenship by naturalization can only be acquired by naturalization under the authority and in the forms of law. But citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution. Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization.

A citizen may be a natural born citizen (using Jay's underscore emphasis), or a naturalized citizen. A natural born citizen is never a naturalized citizen.

Only one alien born, lawfully present in the United States, may be eligible for naturalization. Naturalization is a legal process that takes place subsequent to birth, which bestows United States citizenship upon one who was alien born.

Those alien born are not eligible to exercise the office of President; as opposed to those who are born citizens.