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.
The difference between "native born" and "natural born" citizens:
Quote:
“Citizens may be divided into two classes : natural born and alien born. Natural-born citizens are of two kinds: native born—those born of either American or alien parents within the jurisdiction of the United Slates, and foreign born—those born of American parents without the Jurisdiction of the United States.”
John Clark Ridpath, The standard American encyclopedia of arts, sciences, history, biography, geography, statistics, and general knowledge, Volume 8, pg 3058 (1897).
Other congressional voices during the debate regarding the 1866 Civil Rights Act:
Quote:
“As matter of law, does anybody deny here, or anywhere, that the native-born is a citizen, and a citizen by virtue of his birth alone ?”
Senator Lot M. Morrill, Cong. Globe, 1st Sess. 39th Congress, pt. 1, pg. p. 570 (1866).
Quote:
“Mr. (M. Russel) Thayer, of Pennsylvania, said that the bill was an enactment simply declaring that all men born upon the soil of the United States shall enjoy the fundamental rights of citizenship.”
Cong. Globe, 1st Sess. 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 1151 (1866).
Quote:
“What is a citizen but a human being who, by reason of his being born within the jurisdiction of a government, owes allegiance to that government?”
Congressman John M. Broomall, Cong. Globe, 1st Sess. 39th Congress, pt. 1, pg. 1262 (1866).
Quote:
“Every person born within the United States, its Territories, or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural-born citizen of the United States in the sense of the Constitution…Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England; that is, within the ligeance, or, as it is generally called, the allegiance of the King; and aliens are such as are born out of it.” …… “It makes a man a subject in England, and a citizen here, and is, as Blackstone declares, ‘founded in reason and the nature of government’ … The English Law made no distinction … in declaring that all persons born within its jurisdiction are natural-born subjects. This law bound the colonies before the revolution, and was not changed afterward.”
Rep. Henry Wilson, 1866 Civil Rights Act debates. 10 Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., lst Sess. 1115, 1117 (1866)
Lyman Trumbull (author or the Civil Rights Act of 1866) revisits the issue some years later:
Quote:
“By the terms of the Constitution he must have been a citizen of the United States for nine years before he could take a seat here, and seven years before he could take a seat in the other House ; and, in order to be President of the United States, a person must be a native-born citizen. It is the common law of this country, and of all countries, and it was unnecessary to incorporate it in the Constitution, that a person is a citizen of the country in which he is born….I read from Paschal’s Annotated Consitutution, note 274: “All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country as well as of England. There are two exceptions, and only two, to the universality of its application. The children of ambassadors are, in theory, born in the allegiance of the powers the ambassadors represent, and slaves, in legal contemplation, are property, and not persons.”
Sen. Lyman Trumbull, April 11, 1871, Cong. Globe. 1st Session, 42nd Congress, pt. 1, pg. 575 (1872)
And yet... they are both treated exactly the same way.
What was it Supreme Court Justice Van Devantner said? Oh yeah:
Gosh... native citizens are eligible for the Presidency!!! They must be natural born citizens after all.
Not quite. AFTER that decision, we have SCOTUS Justice Clarke stating:
Quote:
It is not disputed that if petitioner is the son of Kwock Tuck Lee and his wife, Tom Ying Shee, he was born to them when they were permanently domiciled in the United States, is a citizen thereof, and is entitled to admission to the country. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 18 Sup. Ct. 456, 42 L. Ed. 890. But while it is conceded that he is certainly the same person who, upon full investigation was found, in March, 1915, by the then Commissioner of Immigration, to be a natural born American citizen
Therefore further cementing the requirement of birth in the U.S. to parents permanently domiciled in the U.S. to be considered a natural born citizen, and even a citizen at all.
We know for a fact Obama's father was never permanently domiciled in the U.S. He was always in the country on a TEMPORARY student visa and TEMPORARY extensions. Obama's father's 1961 "APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME OF TEMPORARY STAY" in which he states his current temporary stay EXPIRES on August 9, 1961 and he is requesting an extension of his temporary stay to August 9, 1962:
Quite. The Kwock decision does not contradict the Luria decision's assertion that native born citizens are natural born at all. And of course, Justice Van Devanter was hardly alone in that understanding.
Quote:
“As the President is required to be a native citizen of the United States…. Natives are all persons born within the jurisdiction and allegiance of the United States.”
James Kent, COMMENTARIES ON AMERICAN LAW (1826)
Quote:
“That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted) is a happy means of security against foreign influence,…A very respectable political writer makes the following pertinent remarks upon this subject. “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.”
St. George Tucker, BLACKSTONE’S COMMENTARIES (1803)
Quote:
“The term citizen, was used in the constitution as a word, the meaning of which was already established and well understood. And the constitution itself contains a direct recognition of the subsisting common law principle, in the section which defines the qualification of the President… The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not. ”
Lynch vs. Clarke (NY 1844)
Quote:
“Every person, then, born in the country, and that shall have attained the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States, is eligible to the office of president.”
Lysander Spooner, The Unconstitionality of Slavery, pg. 119 (1845)
Quote:
“By the common law of England, which is in force in this country, and which may be assumed as also the law of all the European states, persons within the jurisdiction of the government, or limits of the territory, are either natives, or aliens. Natives are those born within the national jurisdiction; aliens are born without that jurisdiction. The exception to this almost universal rule, are the foreign-born children of ambassadors, who are assumed to carry with them the jurisdiction of the nation which they represent. As a general principle of the English and American law, all native-born, free persons, of whatever age, sex, and parentage, are citizens.”
John Norton Pomeroy,Introduction to Municipal Law, pg. 419 (1865)
If you want more, let me know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Therefore further cementing the requirement of birth in the U.S. to parents permanently domiciled in the U.S. to be considered a natural born citizen, and even a citizen at all.
Again... as we know from the definition of natural born citizen, domicile is irrelevant. Second, as we know from your repeated posts, you don't even know what domicile (let alone "permanent" domicile) even means.
Last edited by HistorianDude; 04-04-2013 at 12:47 PM..
The difference between "native born" and "natural born" citizens:
US Dept of State trumps dictionary.
Quote:
Alfred Pierre Jacob was born in Philadelphia, PA on July 10, 1855 of French parents, his father registered him in the French consulate as a Frenchman; in 1884 the U.S. Dept. of State in correspondence with France explained to them that Mr. Jacob became a naturalized U.S. citizen on December 2, 1874 as a result of his father’s formal naturalization.
KNIGHT'S BOOKS OF REFERENCE. POLITICAL DICTIONARY. Volume I - Charles Knight 1845
Page 104:
"Kent defines an alien to be " a person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States ;" but this definition is not sufficiently strict, for the son of an alien, which son is born in the United States, is also an alien."
Page 511:
"is here understood as only applying to those States in which the constitution, whether written or unwritten, gives to those who are members of such States, or to some considerable number of them, some share of the sovereign power. The usual form in which citizenship is acquired is by birth ; by being born of citizens"
US Supreme Court in the Minor v Happersett case agreed with the doubts that a native-born child to aliens, was a US citizen at all, and further that the doubts had merit as they were yet to be solved.
Seems like your quotes where the word "native" was used, were really intended to mean born of US citizen parents and in the US.
In the Wong Kim Ark DECISION, Chief Justice Horace Gray cited favorably, without opposition, to both the Minor decision and to Horace Binney's recognition of TWO types of born citizens of the US, in Binney's words they were....
1. "the child of an alien, if born in the country"
and
2. "the natural born child of a citizen"
This proves that both the decisions of Minor and Wong Kim Ark associated the words "natural born" to the US citizen status of the PARENTS.
Furthermore, seeing as the Minor court held in it's decision that the definition of "natural born Citizen" was not to be found in the 14th Amendment as well, not to be found the rest of the US Constitution, and this holding in Minor was cited favorably by the Wong Kim Ark decision, along with the Binney two types of born citizens observation, then there is and can be no genuine or reasonable doubt that native-birth did not suffice to make a natural born citizen.
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.
