John Jay (December 12, 1745 – May 17, 1829),
American revolutionary, and the first Chief Justice of the United States
was so concerned about "natural born"
being a PREREQUISITE to being POTUS, that he wrote to
Gen. Washington and underlined this in his letter (see below).
"[T]he people are the sovereign of this country, and consequently that
fellow citizens and joint sovereigns cannot be degraded by appearing
with each other in their own courts to have their controversies determined.
The people have reason to prize and rejoice in such valuable privileges,
and they ought not to forget that nothing but the free course
of constitutional law and government can ensure the continuance
and enjoyment of them."
[John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia]
SCOTUS 2008 apparently regards both John Jay and the American public as 'de minimus'
in their own eager, drunken, continuous disregard of the Constitution
which at least six of them lied that they would protect and defend.
More on Jay's Letter from the Wikipedia....(may be useful information but ALWAYS we must be careful with our acceptance as biased individuals have access to create the article)....
Natural-born citizen
*************************EXCERPT****************************
Constitutional provisions
The special term "Natural Born Citizen" is used in particular as a requirement for eligibility to serve as President or Vice President of the United States. Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution contains the clause:
| “ |
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. |
” |
Additionally, the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that: "[N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
It is generally agreed that these constitutional provisions mean anyone born on American soil to parents who are U.S. citizens is a “natural born citizen” eligible to someday become president or vice-president, whereas anyone whose citizenship is acquired after birth as a result of naturalization "process or procedure" is not a "natural born citizen" and is therefore ineligible for those two positions.[1] In between these extremes lie gray areas and controversy.[2]
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides an additional source of constitutional doctrine stating that birth "in the United States" and subjection to U.S. jurisdiction at the time of birth, entitles one to citizenship:
| “ |
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. . . |
” |
This clause mentions two types of citizenship: citizenship by birth and citizenship by law (naturalized citizens). However, the full text of the fourteenth amendment does not mention the phrase "natural born citizen," nor does it address Presidential qualifications. The phrase "natural born Citizen" is not defined anywhere in the Constitution, as is true with most Constitutional terms.
Section 8 of Article One of the United States Constitution confers on Congress the power "to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization..." This power has been construed to include defining the characteristics of a "natural born citizen", as well as the conditions of "naturalization". But, according to the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual, "the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes."[3]
It is thought the origin of the natural born citizen clause can be traced to a letter of July 25, 1787 from John Jay (who was born in New York) to George Washington (who was born in Virginia), presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention. John Jay wrote: "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."[4] There was no debate, and this qualification for the office of the Presidency was introduced by the drafting Committee of Eleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Constitutional Convention.
[edit] Legislation and executive branch policy
The requirements for citizenship and its very definition have changed since the Constitution was ratified in 1788. Congress first recognized the citizenship of children born to U.S. parents overseas on March 26, 1790, under the first naturalization law: "And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."[5][6] Many members of the 1790 Congress had been members of the Constitutional Convention. In addition, George Washington was president of the Constitutional Convention and President of the United States when this bill became law, yet it was not vetoed.
In 1795, the Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1795 which removed the words "natural born" from the 1790 statute, to state that such children born to citizens beyond the seas are citizens of the U.S., but are not legally to be considered "natural born citizens" of the U.S. This was done to clarify for those living at that time who was and who was not a "natural born citizen" per the framers intent at that time, since the 1790 Act had introduced confusion into that subject in regards to the use of those words in the Constitution. George Washington was also President in 1795, and thus he was aware of this change, and yet did not veto it.
All persons born in the United States, except those not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. government (such as children of foreign diplomats) are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment. Additionally, certain other people have been classified by federal statute as citizens at birth, according to 8 U.S.C. § 1401. The law governing the citizenship of children born outside the U.S. to one or more U.S.-citizen parents has varied considerably over time.[7] Current U.S. statutes define certain individuals born overseas as "citizens at birth."[8]
Currently under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA) effective from December 24, 1952 to present, the definition of the "United States" for nationality purposes, was expanded to add Guam; and, effective November 3, 1986, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (in addition to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands of the United States). Persons born in these territories on or after December 24, 1952 acquire U.S. citizenship at birth on the same terms as persons born in other parts of the United States; and "Outlying possessions of the United States" was restricted to American Samoa and Swains Island. [9]
Regarding people born at U.S. military bases in foreign countries, current State Department policy reads: "Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth."[10] However, the State Department is of the opinion that this does not affect those who are born abroad to U.S. citizens and who otherwise meet the qualifications for statutory citizenship.[11]
[edit] Case law