Natural Born Citizen Defined
 |
| Jon Hubbard |
by Jon Hubbard, Contributing Author: There has been a lot of misinformation and confusion regarding the true definition of the term natural born Citizen (NBC). Some say that being just a Citizen of the U.S. is all that is required to be considered a NBC. The Framers of the US Constitution decided, after much debate, that the President must be not just a US Citizen, but a 'natural born Citizen'. Only the President is required to be a NBC....all other offices need only be a Citizen of the United States.Article II Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution states that: "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;..." To qualify as a 'natural born Citizen' of the United States, BOTH parents must be US Citizens (either natural born, native born or naturalized Citizens) at the time the child is born in the USA.
The 'natural born Citizen' requirement to be president is a 'national security' requirement, because our Framers did not want the Commander-in-Chief of the military to have multiple, or dual citizenships. In other words, the President of The United States must not have allegiances to any country other than the United States of America!
During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, discussions between Founding Fathers John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington led them to choose the definition of natural born Citizen provided by Emerich de Vattel's "Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”, Book 1, Chapter 19, Section 212, (1758). According to "Law of Nations", natural born Citizen is a child born in the USA of two (2) U.S. Citizen parents. Vattel's Law of Nations defines how being a Natural Born Citizen differs from a classification of citizenship given to those simply born in the United States. Natural born and simply being born in the USA does NOT share the same meaning! The parents can be US Citizens by birth or they can be US Citizens by Naturalization after immigrating to the USA. But to create a natural born Citizen of the USA, 'both' parents must be US Citizens at the time the child is born on USA soil.
The Framers even recognized the “Law of Nations” within the US Constitution, where in Article 1, Section 8 it states "The Congress shall have Power To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the “Law of Nations". John Jay wrote a letter to George Washington stating that the citizenship requirement for the Office of Commander-in-Chief of our armies should contain a 'strong check’ against foreign influence. Jay recommended to Washington, and Washington agreed, that the Commander of our Military be open only to a 'natural born Citizen'. Thus, both Washington and Jay agreed that simply being a 'born citizen' was not sufficient to ensure against foreign influence. They wanted allegiance to be solely to the USA. The word ‘natural’ goes to the citizenship of the parents via of natural law as defined in Vattel's "Law of Nations".
According to an article in World Net Daily (wnd.com), “There have been 8 attempts by members of Congress during the years Barack Obama was developing a power base and running for President, to remove the Constitution’s requirement that the president be a natural born Citizen, suggesting an organized strategy.” They clearly knew the true meaning of NBC, otherwise why would they have attempted to change or eliminate this requirement if not to usurp the law?
This is not a Democrat vs Republican issue, but a constitutional issue that applies to candidates of all parties. The reason Barack Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States has nothing to do with the argument over where he was born. However, by his own admission, Obama’s father was never a US Citizen, which in and of itself makes Barack Obama ineligible to be President of The United States. Likewise, Senator Ted Cruz (R) is ineligible because he was born in Canada, not in the United States, and his father was not a US Citizen at the time of Senator Cruz’s birth. Neither Marco Rubio (R) or Bobby Jindal (R) are eligible to be President because one or both of their parents were not US Citizens at the time of Senator Rubio’s nor Governor Jindal’s births.
We must decide if The United States of America is indeed a nation of Laws, and if the US Constitution is indeed the Law of the Land. If so, there can be no argument that a ‘constitutionally unqualified’ person has indeed occupied the Office of The President of the United States since January 2009! The question NOW must be, what are we going to do about it?
Footnotes:
1. What did Congress know about ‘natural-born citizen’? by Bob Unruh
2. The Law of Nations, Book 1 Chapter 19 by Emmerich de Vattel
3. Natural Born Citizen ... By Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
----------------
Jon Hubbard is a former Arkansas State Representative for Dist 75, Jonesboro Arkansas. He is also a former Air Force veteran, school teacher, coach, small businessman and is a conservative writer and contributor author to the ARRA News Service.
Tags: Jon Hubbard, Natural Born, citizen, defined, Constitution To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 2:55 PM - Post Link
6 Comments:
Every US citizen who was born on US soil is a Natural Born US citizen. Only naturalized citizens, who of course were NOT born on US soil, are citizens but not Natural Born citizens. The meaning of Natural Born comes from the common law, and refers to the place of birth. Not the parents. The place of birth.
Here is an example of how Natural Born Citizen was used in the USA in 1803, shortly after the Constitution went into effect:
"Prior to the adoption of the constitution, the people inhabiting the different states might be divided into two classes: natural born citizens, or those born within the state, and aliens, or such as were born out of it. The first, by their birth-right, became entitled to all the privileges of citizens; the second, were entitled to none, but such as were held out and given by the laws of the respective states prior to their emigration. ...St. George Tucker, BLACKSTONE'S COMMENTARIES: WITH NOTES OF REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. (1803)
Notice that that refers only to the place of birth. Parents are not mentioned. Natural Born Citizens were "those born within a state.'
And here is how it was used in 1829:
"Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."---William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed. (1829)
And here is how Edwin Meese, Ronald Reagan's attorney general, used it in a book a few years ago:
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President...."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
And here is one of the TEN appeals court rulings that specifically state that Obama is a Natural Born Citizen due to his place of birth:
“Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural born-born subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [ ] natural-born citizens.”--- Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 NE2d 678, 688 (2009), (Ind.Supreme Court, Apr. 5, 2010)
Here are sources to turn to for further research:
ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause_of_the_U.S._Constitution
http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/scotus-natural-born-citizen-a-compendium.html
http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/the-natural-born-citizenship-clause-updated.html
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/bookmarks/fact-checking-and-debunking/the-debunkers-guide-to-obama-conspiracy-theories/#nbc
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/natural-born-citizenship-for-dummies/
http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/02/an-open-letter-to-mario-apuzzo/
http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=21346
The author is mistaken on several points. Alexander Hamilton specifically said to define terms in the Constitution we must look to the English legal system. Many of the legal concepts in the Constitution are in fact based on English law - ex post facto, Bills of Attainder, impeachment, pardon, Corruption of Blood and natural born for example.
The author is also wrong about the source of the term "Offences against the Law of Nations" in the Constitution. It comes from Blackstone's "Commentaries of the Laws of England" (Book 4, Chapter 5, "Of Offenses Against the Law of Nations). Blackstone's remarks the such offenses include piracy which he says amounts to felonies committed on the high seas. Does that sound familiar?
This is one of the most incompetently tendentious articles on this subject I have ever read. The author cannot manage to get through the first paragraph without resorting to fiction and falsehood.
For example, the third sentence asserts that the NBC requirement was reached "after much debate." But even the most casual review of the records of the Constitutional Convention reveals that there was no so much as a single word of debate on the subject. The NBC clause was approved as presented by the Committee of Eleven on September 4, 1787 without any discussion whatsoever.
And the very next sentence is simply objectively false. President is NOT the only office required to be NBC. The Twelfth Amendment (1804) requires the Vice-President must meet all of the qualifications of being a President, to include being NBC.
From that first paragraph (which is merely objectively incompetent) the rest of the article descends into absurdity and nearly complete fantasy. It is what I like to call "fractally wrong"; i.e. wrong at every level of resolution from broad concept to granular detail.
The Article II version proposed by Hamilton didn't have a natural born citizen clause in it. Hamilton was foreign born.
Editor's Comment: One never knows where an ARRA News Service article will wind up being shared on the Internet. Today, this article by Jon Hubbard is running on BirtherReport.com
LOL. Congrats' Jon!
Isn’t it amazing how these Obot’s keep coming out of the woodwork to attack anyone who dares to expose the truth about their beloved Messiah? They have learned their talking points very well, but our Founders knew that making sure the Commander-in-Chief of our military held no allegiances to any country or government entity other than The United States of America was absolutely vital to our national security! The very one they are trying so desperately to protect is the perfect example of why we cannot afford to ignore the real definition of Natural Born Citizen. Please click this link to see the real truth about Natural Born Citizen, and may God continue to bless our America. http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.htm
Post a Comment
<< Home