Since when did the Constitution mention a candidates parents in reference to eligibility. A person born in the USA who is a citizen at birth is a natural born citizen period. It has been since 1789. I’m sick and tired of people like you who do not know what they are talking about making the rest of us look like nutters. You probably read something on some other nuts website and you take it as gospel. Nobody in over 200 years of American history has questioned the meaning of natural born citizen, born in the USA, until you nuts recently. As for educating myself, I will stick with legitimate books on American history over some conspiracy nuts website.
The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.
Not true!
You can be born in this country and still not be a "Natural Born Citizen". The Constitution implies both parents must be Citizens of the Country at the time of the birth of the proposed Presidential contender. That's why the qualification factors for Presidents are different from Senators and Representatives. Here's what the Constitution says:
[Article II Section I] 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.
The qualifying factor being....what I have underlined. The reason it says....Natural born citizen "OR" a citizen is simply because there is a great difference.
When the Constitution was adopted many qualified men who were being considered for the Presidency had been born of parents who were not citizens of the Country.....because the country had not existed yet. The framers knew this would eventually be sun setted (as time went on) because future presidential candidates would have no reason not to be children of citizens of this nation at the time of their birth. And.....that was the qualifier for the presidency (and not the House, the Senate nor the Supreme Court). You were not required to be a child of U.S. citizens at the time of your birth to hold these other offices. But to be called a "Natural Born Citizen" your parents must have been citizens as well.....at the time of your birth. The other elected (and appointed) offices of the Federal Government had no such requirement to be "Natural Born".
Now.....during the eighteenth century.....what did this term imply? What was its understanding among the populace? Here is what was written in 1758 by a Frenchmen, Emmerich de Vattel in his great work called "The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Laws". This work was read throughout the world and understood to be the common explanation for the term "Natural Born Citizen". Here is the defining paragraph:
[Book I, Chapter XIX, Section 212 "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. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
For this very reason both Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal are neither one....."Natural Born Citizens". Their parents were not citizens at the time of their births.
This is also the reason the current occupant of the White House is not a "Natural Born Citizen". His father was a British subject at the time of his birth......and this is also the reason why his birth certificate controversy is such a waste of time. It makes no difference if he was born in Hawaii; Bozeman, Montana; Shangrila or the lobby of "Independance Hall in Philadelphia on the fourth of July with the Marine Corps band playing the National Anthem outside on the lawn. His father was not a citizen of this country and as such........he should have been vetted and disqualified. Unfortunately, no Republican had the cojones!
Now...........one more time for those in Rio Linda. You can be born in this country and be born a "Citizen"......but you are not considered a "Natural Born Citizen" unless both parents are citizens as well....at the time of your birth.
“Since when did the Constitution mention a candidates parents in reference to eligibility. A person born in the USA who is a citizen at birth is a natural born citizen period. “
You are as full of crap as a Xmas Goose!
“Nobody in over 200 years of American history has questioned the meaning of natural born citizen, born in the USA, until you nuts recently.
The US Supreme Court agrees in numerous decisions, Minor v Happersett being the most clear/relevant, that Natural Born Citizen means....Born in country of Parents that are it’s citizens. This decision was handed down in the 1870’s.....
I suppose that this means that the USSC Justices are....”.... people like you who do not know what they are talking about making the rest of us look like nutters” in your opinion....sigh!
*************
“Since when did the Constitution mention a candidates parents in reference to eligibility.”
It did when is stated that only Natural Born Citizens are eligible.......or, like Billy Clinton, are you disputing the meaning of “is”?
18th century western jurists accepted/defined that term as meaning the concurrence of jus solis and jus sanquinis......birth to the soil and to citizen parents.......There is a rich legal history in this country supporting this definition that you seem to want to ignore.
*****************
“As for educating myself,”...... Like the public school system your “self education” seems to be sorely lacking.....
***********************
I guess thats all I’m gonna say, no use listening/reading to your ad hominum attacks and/or little slurs any longer.
ta ta sonny