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.
There we have, it.. nothing beats a google internet search.. hahaa
which shows you didn't bother to look at the links because it references books and legal findings, all of which are searchable, that associates natural born and native born being the same thing:
A sampling of which you refuse to even bother to do a 30 second search for:
William Rawle -
"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"
James Kent -
"As the President is required to be a native citizen of the United States, ambitious foreigners cannot intrigue for the office, and the qualification of birth cuts off all those inducements from abroad to corruption, negotiation, .."
Joseph Story -
"It is not too much to say, that no one, but a native citizen, ought ordinarily to be intrusted with an office so vital to the safety and liberties of the people. But an exception was, from a deep sense of gratitude, made in favor of ..."
Joseph Bartlett Burleigh - 1849 - 376 pages
"A natural (or native) born citizen of the United States means a person born within the limits of the American Republic;— a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution denotes a foreigner who was then an .."
St. George Tucker, William Blackstone -
"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 .."
Augustine Joseph Hickey Duganne - 1860 - 393 pages
"In however, to be native-born citizens of the order to be eligible to the office of President, a person must have been born in the United States. (2.) He must have resided in the country at least fourteen years, and must be thirty-five years ..."
George Bancroft - 1866
"The king of England, according to the rule of modern civilization, claimed as his subjects all persons born within his dominions : in like manner every one who first saw the light on the American soil was a natural-born citizen ; but ..."
William Lloyd Garrison, New-England Anti-Slavery Society, Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society - 1833 - 192 pages -
"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 .."
that's just a sampling from the above pages, all of which are linked to their publication, of which you can find on Google Books or in a Library (which you seem to be unfamiliar with).
funny how authors of the 1800's found that native-born and natural born meant the same thing as far as citizenship and qualifications for POTUS. and that by simply being born on US soil means you had natural born citizenship. this was the prevailing belief of the legal scholars of the time (Minor V Happersett and US v Wong Kim Ark).
Quote:
Wrong, because that only delt with him being a citizen, not natural born..
Wrong, which shows you're unfamiliar with the case and issues. In fact the Court even stated in in the ruling of where we determined birthright citizenszhip as being Natural born. Straight from English Common Law.
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
Quote:
1A) We have people who are born here with 2 parents
1B) People who are born here with 1 parent a citizen, (might legally be the same)
1C) People who are born here with 0 parents being citizens (i.e. illegal aliens)
2) People who married a citizen
3) People who become a citizen through the citizenship process.
Thats AT LEAST 3 possibly 5. The question remains if 1A-AC are THE SAME..
Nope just two. You made up a third requirements all birthers do.
1) Naturalized - intent to become a citizen by choice through naturalization.
2) Natural born - born a citizen
And you fail on legal precedence. Even if you marry a citizen, you still are required to naturalize to become a citizen. That is why some immigrants who are married to US citizens can STILL be deported or not allowed entry in the United States.
Thats actually where my interest rests in the issue, since I'm adopted. If Im Chinese (i'm not but for the sake of argument), but adopted by us citizens, does this make me natural born? Maybe, since adoptive parents claim their adopted child is theirs, but who knows.
They would go into foster care and be covered under the adoption rules above
Hospital birth records are meaningless to the topic because they are locally controlled by counties, and one can be president without a birth certificate.
Which is why the issue continues to come up, despite everyones claim this is all about Obama.
You were most likely naturalized when you were adopted. I have a friend who just went through this when she adopted 2 children from another country. Her children are clearly considered naturalized citizens in her paperwork.
1A) We have people who are born here with 2 parents
1B) People who are born here with 1 parent a citizen, (might legally be the same)
1C) People who are born here with 0 parents being citizens (i.e. illegal aliens)
2) People who married a citizen
3) People who become a citizen through the citizenship process.
Thats AT LEAST 3 possibly 5. The question remains if 1A-AC are THE SAME..
There's no difference between 2 and 3. None. You can naturalize after a certain period of legal residence through marriage, and that would make you - wait for it - a naturalized citizen. And naturalization is exactly what "the citizenship process" is. No special category for spouses.
1C here ( resident alien parents ). for some silly reason the state dept issued me a US passport. go figure
Oh dear. You just had to bring up that people are born to non-citizen parents that aren't illegally in the US? The poor guy's head is going to explode.
Wrong. The Supreme Court says so. The only distinction between these three scenarios is the citizenship of the parents. And the decision in Wong Kim Ark makes explicitly clear that such a distinction is irrelevant to natural born citizenship.
The Supreme Court never made that distinction.. Stop lying
You were most likely naturalized when you were adopted. I have a friend who just went through this when she adopted 2 children from another country. Her children are clearly considered naturalized citizens in her paperwork.
When you are adopted, you become "legal" children of the parents as if you were born to them.. with all rights and responsibilities as a natural born child.
The citizenship clause of the 14th amendment only lays out the 2 categories. You cannot just make up your own categories of citizenship.
The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties.. It CLEARLY says only those subject to the jurisdiction of the USA.
It says all individuals born, or naturalized.. this would include those natural born and those not natural born AND subject to the jurisdiction..
That would be like saying all men, but then arguing that women arent included.. You arent seriously going to argue that, are you?
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.
AND subject to the jurisdiction..
