Posted on 09/06/2025 6:20:42 PM PDT by CDR Kerchner
(Sep. 6, 2025) — In a striking opinion issued last month, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s opinion that now 75-year-old Roberto Moncada, though born in the United States, should not have been considered a “birthright” citizen.
The decision was first flagged to this writer by CDR. Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret), who on August 30 posted to his blog a video from attorney and broadcaster Robert Goveia providing an analysis of the panel’s 25-page opinion.
Born in New York City in 1950 to a Nicaraguan diplomat, Moncada worked in the United States and was issued a U.S. passport on five occasions, the case record states. Nevertheless, the U.S. District Court for the District of California found, and the Ninth Circuit panel affirmed upon Moncada’s appeal, “the government was…wrong all along” (p. 5). ... continue reading this article at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2025/09/06/birthright-citizenship-of-child-of-foreign-diplomat-revoked/
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
“Les Naturels ou indigènes font ceux qui font nés dans le pays de Parens Citoyens.”
Google Translate: “The Naturals or natives are those who are born in the country of Parents Citizens.”
It refers to the indigenes - indigenous people - since it says “Les Naturels OR indigènes”. Indigenes is thus another way of saying “naturals”. Indigene is still an English word as well as French: “a person who is native to a particular place, in particular a member of an Indigenous people”.
It does NOT refer to the LEGAL TERM “Natural Born Citizen” which was used in legal documents in colonial times (and afterward) as the interchangeable equivalent of “Natural Born Subjects” - a term all the Founding Fathers were familiar with and used.
If you want to know what the legal term meant, as understood by the Founders, it gets a detailed review in Wong Kim Ark:
“II. The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance—also called ‘ligealty,’ ‘obedience,’ ‘faith,’ or ‘power’—of the king. The principle embraced all persons born within the king’s allegiance, and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual,—as expressed in the maxim, ‘Protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem,’—and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance; but were predicable of aliens in amity, so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens, were therefore natural-born subjects. But the children, born within the realm, of foreign ambassadors, or the children of alien enemies, born during and within their hostile occupation of part of the king’s dominions, were not natural-born subjects, because not born within the allegiance, the obedience, or the power, or, as would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction, of the king...
It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
16
III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established....”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/169/649
Note: I firmly believe the illegal aliens of today are the functional equivalent of a foreign army - here without the permission of the US government, not “IN AMITY” (in friendship).
Thus they FAIL the test WKA establishes for being NBC and thus they AND their CHILDREN - IAW Wong Kim Ark - are ALSO not citizens by birth!
This decision clearly points out that 14th Amendment "birthright citizenship" can be revoked if the government has been acting in error in previously granting it.
Moncada relates solely to the case of a child born of an accredited diplomat who was born with diplomatic immunity to our laws and, therefore, was not born subject to United States jurisdiction.
Moncada was granted citizenship at birth in the mistaken belief that his father was a consular officer; an unaccredited diplomat. Later documentation was discovered showing that his father was an accredited diplomat.
No disturbance of centuries old law occurred.
Yes, more information needs to be collected and shown on the U.S. birth certificates about the parents such as their nationality and their reason for being in the country. Fields need to be provided for the father and mother to answer those two key questions. Those questions already appear on the National Security questionnaire form SF-86 which I discussed for another needed use of that form here: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2023/05/07/transparency-requirements-for-candidates-for-president-and-vice-president-more-is-needed-in-our-modern-electoral-process-filing-the-oge-financial-disclosure-form-278e-is-mandatory-the-opm-na/
Some examples for possible answers for the new needed fields on U.S. BC’s. For diplomats maybe “Honduran” and “Diplomat” for the reason for being in the country. A tourist mother would answer like ... “Chinese” for nationality and “Tourist” for reason for being in the country. Students here on a VISA would answer like ... “Saudi Arabian” for nationality and “Student” for reason for being in the country. And illegal alien parents would answer like ... “Mexican” for nationality and reason for being in country “undocumented alien” if they want to use that PC term.
To Help Solve the Birthright Citizenship Abuse Issue, We Will Need Better Birth Certificate Data Going Forward: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2025/05/23/to-help-solve-the-birthright-citizenship-issue-we-will-need-better-birth-certificate-data-going-forward/
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Org: http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org
Author: http://www.kerchner.com/books/naturalborncitizen.htm
Vattel-is-Law-Part-1: https://pixelpatriot.blogspot.com/2015/09/vattel-is-law-part-1.html
Vattel-is-Law-Part-2: https://pixelpatriot.blogspot.com/2016/05/vattel-is-law-part-2.html
This should be enacted immediately, and enforced, with no back doors for the Gavin Newsom types to get around it.
Easy fix with a federal law requiring it as it relates to national citizenship.
Even if the numbers are fake any subsequent check, perhaps even submission of BC to Social Security when an SSN for the kid is requested would allow the vet of the ostensible parents before the kid gets an SSN.
So parent's SSN on birth certificates could be a real, easy fix to confirm valid new US citizenship status. I like it.
TH54 ;-)
Vattel WROTE A BOOK about international law. Not the same as BEING the law in the USA.
Links as active hyperlinks for links used in my prior comment:
“The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”.
https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/
Vattel-is-Law-Part-1 https://pixelpatriot.blogspot.com/2015/09/vattel-is-law-part-1.html
Vattel-is-Law-Part-2 https://pixelpatriot.blogspot.com/2016/05/vattel-is-law-part-2.html
So again, read what the great Vattel, as George Washington and also the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court John Jay characterized him as, said about Citizenship of a nation, and especially, who is a natural born Citizen of a country: https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Author: Natural Born Citizen
http://www.kerchner.com/books/naturalborncitizen.htm
He was a respected commentator on international law, but the passage you keep flogging - to no avail in any court - has nothing to do with NBC. That was just a bad translation made AFTER the US Constitution was written!
You’ve pushed this crap for YEARS and it is all bogus.
The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term in Our U.S. Constitution: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf
Birthright Citizenship - The CASA Decision: https://www.thepostemail.com/2025/06/28/the-casa-decision/
Ilan Wurman | The Case Against Birthright Citizenship NatCon 5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ifpA77Jjuc
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.