Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Native" Citizen
Commentaries on Blackstone | 1803 | St. George Tucker

Posted on 12/21/2008 4:45:49 AM PST by Army MP Retired

That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, whereever it is capable of being exerted, is to he dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. It was by means of foreign connections that the stadtholder of Holland, whose powers at first were probably not equal to those of a president of the United States, became a sovereign hereditary prince before the late revolution in that country. Nor is it with levity that I remark, that the very title of our first magistrate, in some measure exempts us from the danger of those calamities by which European nations are almost perpetually visited. The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora's Box.


TOPICS: History; Reference
KEYWORDS: 911truthers; birthcertificate; blackhelicopters; certifigate; conspiracytheories; constitution; natural; obama; tinfoilhats

1 posted on 12/21/2008 4:45:50 AM PST by Army MP Retired
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired
To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora's Box.

Too late...the commie crooks in the collective Repub/Dem "US association of governance" have figured our how to get around the Constitution...just ignore it.

2 posted on 12/21/2008 4:51:53 AM PST by Earthdweller (Socialism makes you feel better about oppressing people.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Earthdweller

The constitutional crash is going to snowball on us in a big hurry. My state’s house of representatives just voted in favor of a scam to sidestep the electoral college. What it does is takes a statewide popular vote and combines it with the totals from other “member states” and gives all the electoral votes to the winner.

Pdf file

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2007-2008/billintroduced/House/pdf/2008-hIB-6610.pdf

It’s a great way to combine densely populated democrat states with sparsely populated republican states and eliminate the opposition for good.


3 posted on 12/21/2008 5:23:28 AM PST by cripplecreek (The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired

The Justices of the Supreme Court do not live in a bubble. This is the perfect time to set the record straight on Natural Born Citizen, especially when we have millions of anchor babies from all over the world being born here.

And for the record, from everything I have read, it is my interpretation that there is no such thing as an anchor baby. Reading the Federalist papers, with regard to the 14th Amendment, I think it is pretty clear, that “Under the Jurisdiction of” means, the country to which you have your allegiance, not your physical presence.

They did NOT want to follow the same Natural Law that Great Britian had to make subjects of people against their will. The British used Natural Law to strengthen their empire, we were not about being an empire.


4 posted on 12/21/2008 5:31:42 AM PST by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired
Headline 10 Jan. 2009?

Court rejects Berg. Obama bailout?
Riots, Burnings If Obama Disqualified: SCOTUS
"Some people are too big to risk failing Constitution test," says court spokesman

5 posted on 12/21/2008 6:19:28 AM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired
That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be anative-born citizen

That's not what the Constitution states.

The language is "natural born citizen."

A "native born citizen" is one who is born in the U.S. mainland of two foreign parents."

Read this


6 posted on 12/21/2008 7:24:53 AM PST by Beckwith (Typical white person)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beckwith
See my post earlier today on another thread which considers the definitions and usage histories of natural-born and native-born given by the Oxford English Dictionary.

ML/NJ

7 posted on 12/21/2008 8:09:39 AM PST by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Beckwith

Apparently, in 1803 Mr. Tucker interpreted native and natural to by synonymous. The dissertation is based on Blackwell and English law.


8 posted on 12/21/2008 8:55:53 AM PST by Army MP Retired (There Will Be Many False Prophets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired

Even if 0bama was proven to be a non-citizen, the powers that be will ignore it and sweep it under the rug.


9 posted on 12/21/2008 9:09:39 AM PST by Mogollon (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mogollon
> ...the powers that be ...<

and herein lies the problem, the powers that be are no longer We The People, but the federal government.
The powers that once belonged to the people have, over the past 140-150 years, been forfeited to the central government in trade for “security” in one form or another.
The powers not enumerated ... yada, yada, that is a Constitution/BOR long gone and the all powerful federal government has no intention of just returning those powers to the people.

10 posted on 12/21/2008 9:45:01 AM PST by benasawin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired

No, the U.S. Constitution states natural born and not native born.


11 posted on 12/21/2008 11:36:39 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired

“Native born” and “Natural born” are not the same according to the wording used in the facts of cases of Supreme Court rulings.


12 posted on 12/21/2008 11:48:47 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: panthermom
And for the record, from everything I have read, it is my interpretation that there is no such thing as an anchor baby.

AGREED.

Birthright Citizenship and Dual Citizenship: Harbingers of Administrative Tyranny

An in-depth discussion with state Sen. Ron Gould, foe of guest-worker bill

Original intent of the 14th Amendment

Google "DUAL CITIZENSHIP, BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP, AND THE MEANING OF SOVEREIGNTY HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY,AND CLAIMS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 Serial No. 109–63
13 posted on 12/21/2008 1:37:45 PM PST by Cheerio (Barack Hussein 0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio
Here is another in my collection

Anchor Babies
14 posted on 12/21/2008 1:49:21 PM PST by Cheerio (Barack Hussein 0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael

The thugs in the streets who participate in riots don’t run this country. DQ Obama now until he proves that he is a natural born American citizen. I don’t believe that he is!

http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244


15 posted on 12/21/2008 4:49:22 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; Calpernia; STARWISE

Good discussion on Blackstone here.


16 posted on 12/21/2008 6:14:03 PM PST by hoosiermama (Berg is a liberal democrat. Keyes is a conservative. Obama is bringing us together already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: panthermom

“This is the perfect time to set the record straight on Natural Born Citizen”

I completely agree with that. This would be the perfect opportunity to outline that such a fact must be demonstrated prior to the election, how it should be demonstrated, to whom it must be demonstrated, and it would be the perfect time to expand the class of persons who have standing to challenge a candidate’s qualifications.

Even if they found it did not apply for this election (which it of course should apply to) then at least to give a framework for future elections.


17 posted on 12/21/2008 6:50:28 PM PST by Canedawg ("The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2148074/posts

Emmerich de Vattel's The Law of Nations was key in framing the United States as the world's first constitutional republic.
18 posted on 12/21/2008 7:14:47 PM PST by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired

bump

The early revolutionary leaders’ emphasized Vattel as the authority on constitutional law.


19 posted on 12/21/2008 7:18:20 PM PST by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama

Blackstone’s theories were who we revolted against. He was an expert for British legal doctrine.


20 posted on 12/21/2008 7:20:07 PM PST by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; Army MP Retired

“Native born” and “Natural born” are the same in the Law of Nations, the reference used for the Constitution.


21 posted on 12/21/2008 7:21:48 PM PST by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: panthermom

bttt


22 posted on 12/21/2008 7:23:24 PM PST by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

A beg to differ. Not according to two Supreme Court decisions, 1939 Perkins v. ELG and 1898, Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. which makes it clear who is and who is not a natural born citizen.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2151845/posts?page=226#226


23 posted on 12/21/2008 7:45:06 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

You can’t differ. Regardless of those court rulings, I posted the Law of Nations. Scroll up and read.


24 posted on 12/21/2008 7:46:57 PM PST by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

A = I


25 posted on 12/21/2008 7:47:13 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

I’ll differ all I want. The book was written in 1852. It has no bearing here. The Federalist Papers and the thoughts behind the U.S. Constitution is where we get the original intent. Not all laws or foreign definitions were taken as U.S. Constitutional law.

“The common law of England is not the common law of these States.” —George Mason


26 posted on 12/21/2008 7:58:13 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

>>>Not all laws or foreign definitions were taken as U.S. Constitutional law.

The Law of Nations was used to base the Constitution.


27 posted on 12/22/2008 5:42:54 AM PST by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia; Red Steel

While I hear both your points, I think we all agree:

“Show us the BC”
BO’s hiding something and none of us will know what
until a real document is produced.

Simple.


28 posted on 12/22/2008 6:45:20 AM PST by bossmechanic (If all else fails, hit it with a hammer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: panthermom
The Justices of the Supreme Court do not live in a bubble. This is the perfect time to set the record straight on Natural Born Citizen, especially when we have millions of anchor babies from all over the world being born here.

And for the record, from everything I have read, it is my interpretation that there is no such thing as an anchor baby. Reading the Federalist papers, with regard to the 14th Amendment, I think it is pretty clear, that “Under the Jurisdiction of” means, the country to which you have your allegiance, not your physical presence.

They did NOT want to follow the same Natural Law that Great Britian had to make subjects of people against their will. The British used Natural Law to strengthen their empire, we were not about being an empire.

I am normally loathe to respond to posts more than a day old, but yours is emblematic of the sheer ignorance that has been on parade here on FR almost daily in connection this whole "certifigate" non-matter.

To begin with, it is not as if the "natural born citizen" issue has been arising with such regularity so as to compel the Supreme Court to tackle the issue. The Court, like all courts, will always avoid deciding issues on constitutional grounds if it can. And these "birth certificate" cases, which have all been brought by either kooks or highly marginalized ideologues (or both), are quite easily disposed of under the Court's well-established standing precedent before one even begins to gain sight of the so-called merits of the case. Hence, they will to a one all be flushed. Anyone who says otherwise is either stupid, a fool, or ignorant.

Second, what you refer to as an "anchor baby" is someone who is clearly eligible to be President. A person born in the United States is a U.S. citizen, regardless of the citizenship status of their parents. The exception would be the children of diplomats because diplomats are not "subject to the jurisidiction" of the United States -- which is what the 14th Amendment is referring to.

Finally, the fact that you refer to "[r]eading the Federalist papers, with regard to the 14th Amendment," shows that your post has no basis in reality whatsoever. The Federalist Papers were written 80 years before the Fourteenth Amendment was proposed and ratified.

FR used to be like going to a pleasant bar and having a nice drink with a bunch of amiable folks. Sure, there is the occasional drunken lout, but that mattered little, because you could have a good time and chat in depth with friends. With this whole birth certificate lunacy, however, it's been like going to a bench in some dreary pocket park downtown and sharing a bottle of Night Train in a paper bag with a bunch of crazed winos.

29 posted on 12/23/2008 6:36:28 AM PST by King of Florida (A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: King of Florida

Oh, I did read your profile, you are a lawyer, should I back down now because you are smarter than me?

The Supreme Court makes mistakes all the time. The most recent being the Heller case.

Sorry I tend to agree with what is written on this blog, I misspoke about the Federalist Papers.

http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html


30 posted on 12/23/2008 9:08:07 AM PST by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson