is PROVEN-INELIGIBLE.
Will anyone in the US Congress OR SCOTUS stand up?
OR is America dead
Posted on 04/27/2011 9:28:07 PM PDT by HMS Surprise
He most certainly did.
Vattel’s Influence on the term a Natural Born Citizen
§ 212. Of the citizens and natives. “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
Looks like Ticker Guy thinks BHO’s BC was ASSEMBLED.........
Scroll down and watch the video!
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=185119
Bookmark
Me: Vattel never wrote about natural born citizens...
TigersEye: He most certainly did.
Answer: No, he did not. The quote you give is from a bad translation made 10 years AFTER the Constitution. All translations prior read “The natives, or indigenes...”
Indigenes is not a French word for NBC. The legal phrase NBC is translated in other documents of the time as “sujets naturel”. Vattel never, ever uses that phrase in the French, and no translation screwed it up until 10 years after the Constitution.
If the Founders wanted to follow Vattel, they would have required the President to be “a native” or that he be “indigenous” - but that isn’t what they wrote.
I”m sorry TigersEye isn’t very bright. In saying “It is surprising that there has been no judicial decision upon this question.”, the judge is NOT saying that he isn’t GIVING a judicial decision now (in 1844). He is remarking that it is remarkable no one had contested the meaning for the previous 50 years.
One sentence later, the judge goes on to say:
“This circumstance itself, in regard to a point which must have occurred so often in the administration of justice, furnishes a strong inference that there has never been any doubt but that the common law rule [birth making one a NBC] was the law of the land.”
Not only was the judge not casting doubt on the principle, but he was showing that the principle was completely understood and accepted across the land.
LMAO He said what he said.
Can a foreign citizen be the parent of an American citizen? Yes.
Can a foreign citizen be the parent of a natural born American? No. *Notice I wrote “a foreign citizen” not a “foreign born citizen” which could alluded to a naturalized citizen, as naturalization makes the parent an Americana not a foreign citizen.
If natural born status is given to children of foreigners born in America, what is the status of children of American’s born abroad without diplomatic status? They are not considered natural born Americans, yet naturally are considered to be American citizens. So it should follow that while a foreigner’s child is born in America and allowed American citizenship, they are also not considered natural born citizens as it is not natural for a child to not be of it’s parent’s citizenship when born. Only a child born under U.S. sovereignty, with two American citizen parents can naturally claim the status of natural born American. It is not natural for a foreign citizen(s)’ child to be born with a different citizenship than the parent(s) though some countries allow the child of a foreign citizen to claim citizenship when born under their sovereignty rather then born in their homeland under their sovereignty of the country their parent(s) have citizenship, which is where they would naturally be a natural born citizen of their homeland, the place their parent(s) have citizenship.
Can a foreign citizen be the parent of an American citizen? Yes.
Can a foreign citizen be the parent of a natural born American? No. *Notice I wrote “a foreign citizen” not a “foreign born citizen” which could alluded to a naturalized citizen, as naturalization makes the parent an Americana not a foreign citizen.
If natural born status is given to children of foreigners born in America, what is the status of children of American’s born abroad without diplomatic status? They are not considered natural born Americans, yet naturally are considered to be American citizens. So it should follow that while a foreigner’s child is born in America and allowed American citizenship, they are also not considered natural born citizens as it is not natural for a child to not be of it’s parent’s citizenship when born. Only a child born under U.S. sovereignty, with two American citizen parents can naturally claim the status of natural born American. It is not natural for a foreign citizen(s)’ child to be born with a different citizenship than the parent(s) though some countries allow the child of a foreign citizen to claim citizenship when born under their sovereignty rather then born in their homeland under their sovereignty of the country their parent(s) have citizenship, which is where they would naturally be a natural born citizen of their homeland, the place their parent(s) have citizenship.
“He said what he said.”
Yes, and apparently you are too stupid to understand his plain English. Not surprising, since you also don’t know what Vattel wrote, or understand legal terms used in the Constitution!
No, you’re a moron who can’t understand plain English. A fool too. And a jerk. Also a stupid nitwit. ;-)
“If natural born status is given to children of foreigners born in America, what is the status of children of American’s born abroad without diplomatic status? They are not considered natural born Americans, yet naturally are considered to be American citizens. So it should follow that while a foreigner’s child is born in America and allowed American citizenship, they are also not considered natural born citizens as it is not natural for a child to not be of it’s parent’s citizenship when born. Only a child born under U.S. sovereignty, with two American citizen parents can naturally claim the status of natural born American.”
Common sense above. It’s amazing to me that people are unable to think about these issue for themselves. A dollop of Socratic method reveals the truth, regardless of the spin from Rogers et al. The Constitution says the hurdle is not citizenship, it is a special type of citizenship. Is it special when Maria Fuentes drops in an American hospital in the morning, then returns to Juarez that evening to live for the next 30 years? Her son Jose could legally run for President from Juarez, not speaking a word of English, according to the... trying very hard to keep it clean her... trolls here.
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.