Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not in any translation of Vattel. To this very day, every single English translation of Vattel in world History has translated "naturels" to mean "natives."
I already posted in this thread that Ben Franklin and the other Framers had 3 copies of Vattel in French. I posted his letter thanking Dumas for those copies.
In addition, from the other Vattel passage I posted, it is quite clear that Vattel considered those born to foreign citizen fathers to not even be citizens at all.
....this has to more in the direction of making the Constitution irrelevant, or at the very least changing the fabric of it's meanng and significance. Why?
nice.
claud, humor me for a moment. consider, just consider, that the view me and HD express ( the one shared by 99.9998% of the legal community ) is actually correct. would you still think then that we are trying to change the meaning and significance of the US constitution?
claud, you've claimed that you are only trying to get a clear definition of eligibility requirements in the US constitution. if that were the case then you should have been all over the "14year residency" clause. it's incredibly vague. are the 14years consecutive or collective? if consecutive are they the previous 14, the first 14 or any 14? if consecutive how are they counted? by complete years? by complete months? weeks? days?
i've brought up the 14year clause multiple times in this forum but it doesn't appear to be something you wish to discuss claud. my belief is that it isn't of importance to you because it doesn't pertain to obama.
I already posted in this thread that Ben Franklin and the other Framers had 3 copies of Vattel in French. I posted his letter thanking Dumas for those copies.
In addition, from the other Vattel passage I posted, it is quite clear that Vattel considered those born to foreign citizen fathers to not even be citizens at all.
In the 1884 case Elk v. Wilkins, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on native American indians, because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction. A Mexican citizen sneaking across our border, or even visiting legally does not fall under US jurisdiction either, because he is still a citizen of Mexico.
I already posted in this thread that Ben Franklin and the other Framers had 3 copies of Vattel in French. I posted his letter thanking Dumas for those copies.
Yes. In French. Hence completely lacking the phrase "natural born citizen."
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
In addition, from the other Vattel passage I posted, it is quite clear that Vattel considered those born to foreign citizen fathers to not even be citizens at all.
Since Vattel had no influence on US citizenship law, it does not matter what his opinion was on that issue.
In the 1884 case Elk v. Wilkins, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on native American indians, because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction.
Absolutely.
A situation absent from the common law, as discussed in detail in the decision for US v. Wong Kim Ark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
A Mexican citizen sneaking across our border, or even visiting legally does not fall under US jurisdiction either, because he is still a citizen of Mexico.
The Supreme Court has ruled otherwise.
Quote:
The real object of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in qualifying the words, "All persons born in the United States" by the addition "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," would appear to have been to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words (besides children of members of the Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National Government, unknown to the common law), the two classes of cases -- children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State -- both of which, as has already been shown, by the law of England and by our own law from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in America, had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the country.
In the Minor v. Happersett decision, SCOTUS defined Constitutional NBC as born in the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents.
The Wong Kim Ark decision subsequently affirmed the Minor v. Happersett SCOTUS definition of Constitutional NBC by direct citation. WKA was ruled a citizen only. He did NOT meet the SCOTUS criteria for NBC, which the WKA decision specifically referenced.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
