Research - Vattel & the meaning of the Constitutional term "Natural Born Citizen"

http://www.loc.gov/index.html ^ | 5/12/2010 | many

[rxsid]

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 from the U.S. Constitution states:

"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States."

[DiogenesLamp]

Excellent research, Diogenes, and thanks for the ping, bp.

Thanks, I got lucky. Sorry I forgot to add your name to the initial message, but I was hoping the ones I pinged would get the message out to everyone else. :)

It is fascinating to read the reference, which makes perfect sense in the context of natural-born citizenship. My angle is that I find it unimaginable that Founders meant, by ‘natural born citizen’, ‘the spawn of foreign/enemy nationals’. It’s absurd to think that was their idea. They were not, iow, codifying the King of England’s right to sire future POTUSs. Those who argue otherwise are beyond the realm of my comprehension. I think like a patriot, and no patriot I know wants a half-foreigner to lord it over us. The odds of half-foreigners hating the US and/or lacking allegiance to it are much greater than for natural born citizens.

As I have pointed out repetitively, prior to 1922 (cable act) and 1934 (Women's citizenship act) it was not even possible to have a split nationality child. In most of this countries history, the nationality of the child followed the father. Upon marriage, a woman became the same nationality as her husband, so any children were automatically of the same nationality as whatever the father was. We are dealing with a circumstance of which the founders had likely never conceived.

[DiogenesLamp]

Good find, indeed.

Thanks. I hope we can find a lot more before this is over.

Another link in the chain of evidence.

The MSM and the politicians never ventured to question that dog and pony show Obama staged when he posted his new forged long-form COLB and then distracted attention from it with the bin Ladin raid.

Do not ever doubt that this man is solely motivated by what he sees as in HIS best interest. I find the nearly simultaneous occurrence of the two events to be rather excessively coincidental.

But the birth issue is still unresolved. As before, the left will keep putting it to bed or sweeping it under the rug or insulting anyone who brings it up, but it’s not going to go away.

Nor should it. We need to keep harping on it, and spreading the word. If we educate enough of the public as to what is correct, eventually people will "get it."

[Cicero]

I find the nearly simultaneous occurrence of the two events to be rather excessively coincidental.

No telling for sure, but several of the early stories about the bin Ladin raid said that they had discovered where he was about six months earlier, but that Obama delayed doing anything about it.

Obama always delays such matters, but the likeliest explanation is that he was planning to use it to increase his popularity before the next election. His poll numbers did pop for a few weeks after it took place--people are pretty dumb about these things, and the media went all out.

But it looks to me as if he may have been working with Trump--who has donated only to Democrats and RINOs in the past, and has made some of his money by working with the government--so that he would have a plausible reason for suddenly releasing his fake long-form COLB after two or three years of unexplained delay, and then used the planned bin Ladin raid as a way to immediately take attention away from the birth issue again. Wasn't it kind of strange the way the leftist media gave so many opportunities for Trump to spread his message? Of course he's a master PR guy with media connections, but the leftie talk shows strangely helped, perhaps on covert directions from their political masters.

[Fantasywriter]

Please feel free to ping me any time! There’s some really fascinating stuff coming to light, it seems to me. I’ve always thought it would hit the fan eventually. The lower BO’s poll #s go, the more we’ll learn about his mysterious past.

As for NBC, there is no mystery there. The Founders didn’t envision half-foreigners to be NBCs, and anybody who says otherwise is just not thinking clearly, period.

Thanks for all your great work. I don’t have the time to post right now that I wish I did, but I try to follow the overall discussions. You’re on fire as usual; it’s great to see your work get posted. I look forward to more in the future.

[DiogenesLamp]

Vattel mentioned by CANDIDUS in "To the People of Pennsylvania", Philadelphia, February 3, 1776.

"Finally, with M. de Vattel, I account a State a moral person, having an interest and will of its own; and I think that State a monster whose prime mover has an interest and will in direct opposition to its prosperity and security. This position has been so clearly demonstrated in the pamphlet first mentioned in this essay, that I shall only add, if there are any arguments in favour of returning to a state of dependance on Great Britain, that is, on the present Administration of Great Britain, I could wish they were timely offered, that they may be soberly considered before the cunning proposals of the Cabinet set all the timid, lazy, and irresolute members of the community into a clamour for peace at any rate. CANDIDUS"

http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.11302:1.amarch

[DiogenesLamp]

Candidus mentions "Droit des Gens", Philadelphia, March 6, 1776.

All Europe must allow, that while America was in the greatest good humour with her old mother, a scheme was laid to keep up a large standing army in her capital towns, and to tax her at pleasure for the support of it. They see that, from time to time, the most fraudulent and violent measures have been taken to support their entirely unprecedented claim, till at last, drained of their national troops, they have applied for assistance to other nations. By the law of nations we were discharged from our allegiance the moment the army was posted among us without our consent, or a single farthing taken from us in like manner; either of these being fundamental subversions of the Constitution. "It remains entirely with ourselves to have ample justice done to us. We have nothing to do but declare off, and appeal to the droit des gens. A very respectable power has given as unequivocal proofs as can be wished of her disposition to right us.

http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/contextualize.pl?p.12847.amarch.8176

[DiogenesLamp]

Thomas Jefferson referring to the difference in origins between American law and British law.

"Our Revolution commenced on more favorable ground. It presented us an album on which we were free to write what we pleased. We had no occasion to search into musty records, to hunt up royal parchments, or to investigate the laws and institutions of a semi-barbarous ancestry. We appealed to those of nature, and found them engraved on our hearts. Yet we did not avail ourselves of all the advantages of our position. We had never been permitted to exercise self-government. When forced to assume it, we were novices in its science. Its principles and forms had entered little into our former education."

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl278.htm

[DiogenesLamp]

On December 28, 1784, The State Assembly of Maryland Makes marquis de la Fayette a "natural born citizen" of Maryland.

II. Be it enacted, by the general assembly of Maryland, That the marquis de la Fayette, and his heirs male for ever, shall be, and they and each of them are hereby deemed, adjudged, and taken to be, natural born citizens of this state, and shall henceforth be entitled to all the immunities, rights and privileges, of natural born citizens thereof, they and every of them conforming to the constitution and laws of this state, in the enjoyment and exercise of such immunities, rights and privileges.

http://aomol.net/000001/000203/html/am203--378.html

What makes this significant is that it represents a complete acknowledgement by the Entire Legislature of Maryland that Citizenship shall descend through the male line, i.e. "Fathers." No mention is made of "place" whatsoever. This act Precedes the ratification of the US Constitution by the Maryland Assembly, and it is a reasonable to believe that they fully understood and agreed with the concept of citizenship through descent of Fathers 3 1/2 years later when they ratified the Constitution.

.

[DiogenesLamp]

You might be interested in some stuff I just put into this thread. :)

[bushpilot1]

Thanks for posting..a few freepers know this subject...it’s good to know you are digging and on on our side.

We appreciate your kind and natural wisdom.

[Fantasywriter]

Thanks for the ping. It looks like fascinating and valuable research. I plan to be back to read it more thoroughly as soon as time permits.

[DiogenesLamp]

It is my pleasure. Let me also say how much I appreciate the work that you and others have done. It is a shame that the ability to weigh and reason has fallen out of fashion in our nation. We have become addicted to the drugs of seemingly free money and mind atrophying entertainment.

[rxsid]

Two additional legal sources from the time that state the same definition:

"Timothy Cunningham's Law Dictionary (1771) was the only law dictionary that James Madison ordered for the Continental Congress. It was one of the most popular comprehensive English dictionaries of the late eighteenth century, and was found in many personal libraries, including those of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. It was contemporaneously used by various American Supreme Courts for clarification of legal terms. (Berry, pp.347-8). Under the "Aliens" section of his Law Dictionary, Cunningham defined "natural-born subject" as one who is born within the king's realm, of parents who are under the king's "actual obedience":

All those are natural born subjects, whose parents, at the time of their birth, were under the actual obedience of our king, and whose place of birth was within his dominions. (Cunningham, p.95, in section entitled "Aliens")

Note: Justice Scalia cited Timothy Cunningham’s New and Complete Law Dictionary (1771) in the recent Washington, DC, v. Heller case.[1]

The exact same definition of "natural-born subject" is found in Matthew Bacon's A New Abridgment of the Law, Volume 1, published in 1736. (Bacon, Matthew, p.77).

When the U.S. Constitution was being written, Giles Jacob's New Law Dictionary (1782) was "the most widely used English Law dictionary" (Berry, pp.350-1). Jacob defined "subject born" (an actual natural-born subject) as anyone born within the king's realm, of parents who are under the king's "actual obedience":

There are two incidents regularly that are necessary to make a subject born: first, that his parents, at the time of his birth, be under the actual obedience of the king; Secondly, that the place of his birth be within the king's dominions. (Jacob, p.40)

http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

On a related note, both are listed under "Common Law" in the Tarlton Law Library.

1700's natural born Citizen (or subject) = born in country to 2 citizen (subject) parents.

[thecodont]

Thank you for your research!

[EDINVA]

“Now careful legal work is likely to be able to place the evidentiary burden on Obama to show where he was born but some of the many pleadings in these cases do not do this correctly and will muff this issue.”

So go find someone who can establish standing in the courts and bring his/her case to the courts. You don’t get any discovery that might lead to evidence until you have standing. None of the courts allowed discovery in any case involving Obama’s eligibility. There’s been no discovery “to place the evidentiary burden on Obama,” and nothing to muff.

I’ve thought that Marco Rubio might be a good candidate. He could force the courts to decide his own eligibility since his parents were not (apparently) citizens at the time of his birth, albeit in the US. He could argue that he’s being considered to run as a VP candidate, and given succession, he would have to know before accepting the position if he were constitutionally eligible.

Such a suit, were it to proceed and to obtain a SCOTUS Opinion, wouldn’t at this point unseat Obama, but it would resolve the Framers’ intent.

Unfortunately, the SCOTUS and all the federal courts are, in fact, political institutions. The justices/judges read the newspapers. They read polls. There was no way in hell they were going to take any case involving Obama during his first two years in the White House when most of the challenges were proceeding, unsuccessfully, in the courts.

[rodguy911]

Exactly, if Obama Sr. was his father then he became a Kenyan citizen,British at the time and later Kenyan. Later still Indonesian.There is no case for him to have been eligible to run for potus.Whomever vetted him should be tried for treason.

[DiogenesLamp]

Two additional legal sources from the time that state the same definition:

Good work! This very much reinforces the idea that the English law on citizenship was not simply so cut and dried as being "born there" as many would have us believe. I suspect it is Blackstone that has caused the most problem in this regard. The whole issue begs the question: If the only requirement is being "born there" then why mention parents in the definition?

Would you happen to have images of the original documents? I think the point is more strongly reinforced when people can see the actual print, and the cover page of the book it came from.

[DiogenesLamp]

You put me onto a lead. I found the pamphlet written by James Otis * called: " The rights of the British Colonies asserted and Proved." (Original 1764) Below is a subsequent reprint.

You might also find this bit of text interesting.

*Otis died suddenly in May 1783 at the age of 58 when, as he stood in the doorway of a friend's house, he was struck by lightning. He is reported to have said to his sister, Mercy Otis Warren, "My dear sister, I hope, when God Almighty in his righteous providence shall take me out of time into eternity that it will be by a flash of lightning".

Link for anyone wanting to read this pamphlet themselves.

Link to an article which demonstrates this pamphlets linkage with Vattel.

[rxsid]

Yes, the works of Otis are revealing...years before the Declaration of Independence.

Regarding images, I agree (have a look at my profile...or this thread for example). Time to conduct additional (or extensive) research is at a premium for me these day, lately. When I get the chance, I'll dig around for supportive information.

Keep up the good work!

[DiogenesLamp]

---------------------------------------------------------

Pages 115-116 of this book. Link