The founder's minds on Citizenship.

http://memory.loc.gov ^ | 7/5/2011 | DiogenesLamp

[DiogenesLamp]

I have always said that if you want to know about "original intent", you should read what the Founders said and wrote, not what a Judge tells you they meant. Some people may not be aware that there is more information (regarding the meaning and intent of legislation) to be had by reading the debates in Congress. I have recently been perusing the debates in Congress regarding the "Naturalization Act of 1790." This act specifically forbids the Child of an American woman and a Foreign father from being considered an American citizen, unless the Father comes to America to becomes a citizen.

As this act was passed just a year after the Constitution was ratified, and as some of the members of Congress were DELEGATES to the Constitutional Convention, (Such as Congressman James Madison) no better insight can be had regarding their attitude about citizenship than can be found by reading the Debates in congress on this naturalization act. I thought others might be interested in this as well, and so here are the links to the Index for the House and Senate Debates on the Naturalization act of 1790.

House index link:

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llac&fileName=001/llac001.db&recNum=650

Senate index link:

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llac&fileName=001/llac001.db&recNum=642

Just look under "Naturalization...". The entry will provide the page number in the same book to find the debates on this act. Here is the page where the process began.

[PA-RIVER]

Thanks for sharing this. It makes it much clearer that an NBC is born of two US citizens.

Like a natural pair when playing cards, you just can't have a wild card and still be a natural. You would still have a pair, but not a natural pair. You can be born a citizen and still not be a Natural-born-citizen. You would have the wild-card of a second citizenship, and disqualifies for the presidency.

From birth to age of 21, Obama was a legal Kenyan Citizen.
This statement is fact, not opinion.

[rxsid]

"Like a natural pair when playing cards, you just can't have a wild card and still be a natural. You would still have a pair, but not a natural pair. You can be born a citizen and still not be a Natural-born-citizen. "

That's an excellent analogy! Bravo! Don't be surprised if you see that being repeated elsewhere ;)

"From birth to age of 21, Obama was a legal Kenyan Citizen."

Additionally...Barry was also a British citizen at birth until at least age of 2 (when Kenya became independent) and possibly even Indonesian if he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro.

Not only was/is Barry a dual citizen...the guy is a multi-national having up to 4 different citizenship's/nationalities.

It's impossible the framers would have considered a multi-national to be a "natural born Citizen."

[DiogenesLamp]

I am looking at the bigger picture. What is being discussed is what makes a "citizen", and what laws define a "citizen", and how this discussion of "citizenship" provides insight into the "original intent" regarding the concept. My point is that if discussion and legislation had to take place just so these individuals could even be considered "citizens", there is no way they could in any conceivable way, have been considered "natural born citizens" prior to the discussion and legislation.

Absolutely! If the founders wouldn't even allow citizenship for the children of a foreigner, why would they regard the child of a foreigner to be a "Natural born citizen" just because they were born on the soil?

It makes no sense to believe that they would.