Who Is A "Natural Born Citizen"?

Who Is A “Natural Born Citizen”?

So I’m on the O’Reilly Factor and I say if the Republicans don’t put Marco Rubio on their national ticket they need to get their heads examined. Such is my regard for the freshman senator from Florida.

What followed were emails from people who told me that Rubio can’t be vice president because the Constitution says only “natural born citizens” can be president or vice president, and he doesn’t fit the description.

Some went a tad further. Ray said I need to “wake up.” Gregor – who signed his name “American by Birth – Patriot by Choice” said my comment about Rubio was both “uneducated” and “foolish.” Edward said, “I’m sure you have read the Constitution but I urge you to reread Article I, Section II which gives the qualifications for president.” David simply stated that, “Neither of Marco Rubio’s parents were citizens of our country when he was born. Therefore, Marco Rubio is not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States.”

I’m always amused when I get letters from self-appointed “scholars” who have no doubt – none! – about how knowledgeable they are when it comes to constitutional law even though not one of them spent even 10 minutes in law school. How do I know? If they had, trust me, they would have mentioned it – IN CAPITAL LETTERS!

Many of these people, I suspect, have another agenda, which I’ll get to shortly. But first …

The Constitution does not define the term “natural born citizen.” And as Wikipedia explains, “scholars and politicians have not agreed as to whether U.S.-born children of non-citizens … qualify as natural born citizens.”

Also from Wikipedia: “The natural born citizen clause has been mentioned in passing in several decisions of the United States Supreme Court and lower courts, but the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate’s eligibility as a natural born citizen.”

So what did the Founders have in mind when they used that term they didn’t bother to define? Well, after the Constitution was ratified, some of the Founders opined about the meaning of the clause. Here’s what James Madison, one of the authors of the Constitution, had to say on the subject in a speech before the House of Representatives in May 1789:

“It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its force sometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States.”

So Mr. Madison, speaking directly to the question of who is and who is not a “natural born citizen” states that here in the United States “place” – or where you were born” – trumps “parentage” – the citizenship of your mother and father.

Now let’s get to what I believe is the real motive behind all of this. And it has a lot less to do with Marco Rubio than Barack Obama.

At the risk of sounding cynical, I think some of this is birther nonsense, just the latest lame attempt to make a case that Barack Obama is not a legitimate president. His father, after all, was not a U.S. citizen, therefore, Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen, and ipso facto, he should never have been allowed to become president.

In fact, one of my email pals, Cyndee, said just that: He [Barack Obama] is not a natural born citizen because of his father. Case closed. While the Republicans let the Democrats get away with it, I doubt the Dems will return the favor [if Rubio becomes vice president].”

Well, case not closed. As Wikipedia states, “Although numerous claims have been put forth that the current president, Barack Obama, is not a natural born citizen, the relevant courts have so far dismissed all lawsuits brought over this question.”

I hope the Republicans heed my advice and the advice of many others and put Marco Rubio on their ticket. And I hope the ticket wins. Then Cyndee or Ray or Edward or David or Gregor the Patriot can go to court and make a federal case out of it. When they lose, I hope they will stop beating the dead horse.

http://www.facebook.com/bpeters3 Bill Peters

prev | next
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
Pastora

CBW Racism Video: 12:49 markIts not OPERATIONALIZED in our fiamly/homes/community!!!!CBW – Negroes like Steve prefer ‘IDEOLOGICAL UNITY’ and they use “CONGREGATIONAL COMPLICITY”
Jardin

Morning, All,Quote of the year from WND: Here’s wiishng you all the best for 2010, when we all hope Kanye West will storm on stage and steal the teleprompter from the occupier in chief.
Sidinho

The MORON bmeobr botched the job ,and was in part rewarded with some well seared private parts. The rest of his reward will be forthcoming ..LIFE in prison.
Paige Roper Norman

“So Mr. Madison, speaking directly to the question of who is and who is not a “natural born citizen” states that here in the United States “place” – or where you were born” – trumps “parentage” – the citizenship of your mother and father.”

In that vein, then, are children born in the US of illegal immigrant parents considered “natural born citizens”?

mystylplx

Yes.

Michael Le Houllier

Prior to the 14th amendment, anyone born in the U.S. was already considered a U.S. citizen at birth and thus a natural born U.S. citizen. This comes from the common law heritage which recognzed that jus soli was the primary basis for citizenship. Until recently, England recognized this and had for centuries. There are Supreme Court decisions that have already ruled that anyone born on U.S. soil is a natural born U.S. citizen. This whole argument over people born on U.S. soil is over the top. President Obama is a natural born U.S. citizen, and so is Rubio.

Last on standing

This is BS and I don’t mean Barbara Striesand either..You need to be educated.

chairyogafor seniors

Wonderful work! That is the kind of information that should be shared around the web. Shame on the search engines for now not positioning this put up upper! Come on over and visit my website . Thank you =)
The Obama Timeline author

You are being a bit selective in your research, Mr. Goldberg. I would like to think that you know of sources other than Wikipedia, but that is apparently not the case.

Your logic is quite flawed. That James Madison considered place of birth more important than the citizenship of one’s parents certainly does not mean that he considered the latter irrelevant.

In 1862, Congressman John Bingham—the “father of the 14th Amendment”—stated, “All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” In 1866 Bingham stated, “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” Bingham’s definition was never disputed by other Congressmen. (Unscrupulous Obots—including attorneys filing briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court—have omitted the words “of parents” when quoting Bingham’s statement, in a shameful and intentional effort to mislead.)

In Minor v. Happersett (1875) Chief Justice of the Supreme Court C. J. Waite wrote, “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.”

Charimon

Please cite your srcoue regarding John McCain [going] to the Senate where is the fact that HE initiated that request? In looking at the co-sponsors, I think there is a different explanation. If it was McCain initiated/directed/orchestrated, I would have expected to see Lindsay Grahmnesty on the co-sponsor list..

fonts

Thanks for the good writeup. It if truth be told was a amusement account it. Look complicated to far added agreeable from you! By the way, how can we keep in touch?
lady gaga

Its like you learn my thoughts! You appear to know so much approximately this, like you wrote the e book in it or something. I feel that you simply could do with a few % to drive the message home a little bit, but instead of that, that is excellent blog. An excellent read. I’ll definitely be back.