Replies

It seems like the group here is going around in circles when the definition of Natural Born Citizen can be found using deductive reasoning and legal terms in the Constitution itself.

First, let’s define 6 different scenarios for acquiring citizenship:

1. Born in U.S. to 2 U.S. Citizens
2. Born in U.S. to 1 U.S. Citizen and 1 foreign Citizen
3. Born in U.S. to 2 foreign Citizens
4. Born overseas to two U.S. Citizens
5. Born overseas to 1 U.S. and 1 foreign Citizen
6. Naturalized Citizen

Article II defines 2 different types of citizenship:

a. Natural Born Citizen
b. Citizen of the United States

This eliminates Naturalized citizens (6), and citizens born overseas (4),(5). It also confirms that a “Citizen of the United States” born after 1787 is not eligible to become President. Pay close attention to this because it’s a very important legal term in the Constitution. Looking at Amendment XIV, we see a clarification of what a "Citizen of the United States" is:

a. Someone who is born under the Jurisdiction of the U.S.
b. Someone who is naturalized

We know immediately from this that "Citizen of the United States" is not a "Natural Born Citizen" because of the "OR" clause in Amendment XIV. Anyone requiring citizenship via Amendment XIV is ineligible for the presidency because we know naturalized citizens and Amendment XIV citizens are both "Citizens of the United States". We also know that Article II clearly states that a “Citizen of the United States” is not qualified if he or she is born after 1787.

So, now we know that anyone who gains citizenship via Amendment XIV is not eligible to become President. Rather convenient considering the freed slaves were not eligible, nor ever would be, don’t you think?

The next question arises. When does Amendment XIV apply to those born in the U.S.? The answer to eligibility boils down to the Amendment itself by asking a simple question:

Were you subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at your time of your birth?

There are three answers to this:

1. Yes (100%) – Born to 2 U.S. Citizens on U.S. soil
2. Maybe (50%) – Born to 1 U.S. Citizen on U.S. soil
3. Maybe (10%) – Born to Foreign Citizens on U.S. soil

In the case of (1), Amendment XIV is not needed and does not apply. In the case of (2) and (3), Amendment XIV is needed and does apply.

The answer is clear. Amendment XIV children (those who have to use it to gain citizenship) are Citizens of the United States as stated in the U.S. Constitution and therefore will never be qualified to be President of the United States.

It seems like the group here is going around in circles when the definition of Natural Born Citizen can be found using deductive reasoning and legal terms in the Constitution itself.
First, let’s define 6 different scenarios for acquiring citizenship:

Article II defines 2 different types of citizenship:

a. Natural Born Citizen
b. Citizen of the United States

a. Someone who is born under the Jurisdiction of the U.S.
b. Someone who is naturalized

We know immediately from this that “Citizen of the United States” is not a “Natural Born Citizen” because of the “OR” clause in Amendment XIV. Anyone requiring citizenship via Amendment XIV is ineligible for the presidency because we know naturalized citizens and Amendment XIV citizens are both “Citizens of the United States”. We also know that Article II clearly states that a “Citizen of the United States” is not qualified if he or she is born after 1787.

The next question arises. When does Amendment XIV apply to those born in the U.S.? The answer to eligibility boils down to the Amendment itself by asking a simple question:

Were you subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at your time of your birth?

There are three answers to this:

1. Yes (100%) – Born to 2 U.S. Citizens on U.S. soil
2. Maybe (50%) – Born to 1 U.S. Citizen on U.S. soil
3. Maybe (10%) – Born to Foreign Citizens on U.S. soil

In the case of (1), Amendment XIV is not needed and does not apply. In the case of (2) and (3), Amendment XIV is needed and does apply.

Quick! Somebody tell the Supreme Court of the United States because they don’t seem to be the least bit interested in the interpretations listed above.
In fact Justice Scalia appears to be under the impression that the requirement for Natural Born Citizen status is simply “jus soli”, birth in a nation.

In “Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS” (No. 99-2071), Justice Scalia made it clear that his opinion is that natural born citizenship is based [only] on “jus soli” (birth in the United States).

Here is the relevant section from the transcript from oral arguments:

Justice Scalia: … “I mean, isn’t it clear that the natural born requirement in the Constitution was intended explicitly to exclude some Englishmen who had come here and spent some time here and then went back and raised their families in England?

They did not want that.

They wanted natural born Americans.”

Plaintiff’s attorney [Ms.] Davis: Yes, by the same token…

Justice Scalia: That is jus soli, isn’t it?

[Ms.] Davis: By the same token, one could say that the provision would apply now to ensure that Congress can’t apply suspect classifications to keep certain individuals from aspiring to those offices.

Justice Scalia: Well, maybe.

I’m just referring to the meaning of natural born within the Constitution.

I don’t think you’re disagreeing.

It requires “jus soli” doesn’t it?

The only persons who aren’t “subject to the jurisidiciton thereof” are those with diplomatic immunity or members of a foreign occupying military on US soil.

A foreign tourist or illegal alien in the United States is still “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” that’s why our prisons hold so many foreigners who committed crimes in the US and that’s how we can catch and deport illegal aliens who are subject to the jurisdiction of our immigration and border control laws.

Oh, and Senator John Sidney McCain who was born overseas could have been elected president if he had gotten 194 more Electoral College votes.