Tweet
Must Read: The Who, What, When, Where, Why, And How Of The Article II “natural born Citizen” Term
Birther Report
2/28/2016
Excerpt:
The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term In Our United States Constitution 1
By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired)
28 February 2016
Who: The various sovereign, free, and independent several states, as a result of the revolution against England had loosely banded together in a confederation to battle England and thus formed the new United States in 1776. In 1787 they decided to convene a convention of the states to draw up a Constitution to form a stronger, “more perfect” union and appointed delegates from their several states for that purpose. The delegates met in the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, PA to write the new contract. While there, the delegates considered, among many things, the eligibility qualifications for who could be the President of the new stronger more perfectly unified United States under the in-draft and newly proposed Constitution of the United States2.
Early on they considered requiring the President to be only a “Citizen”3. Being very concerned about foreign intrigue and influence entering into the halls of power this was thought not to be a strong enough protection against foreign influence4 on the person who would hold the singularly most powerful office under the proposed new Constitution. Then as is mentioned in Madison’s notes5 of the Constitution Convention proceedings, Alexander Hamilton at some points in time had proposed to the various delegates that for the office of President, that the person being simply and only a “Citizen” would be fine for the founding generation who were the “original Citizens”, and who had shed their blood in the cause of forming the new nation, but that in the future after the new Constitution was adopted and once the founding generation was gone, the President would have to have stronger allegiance to the nation and be “born a Citizen”6, which today is more commonly called in U.S. Statutory Laws a “Citizen at or by Birth”. Hamilton may have been concerned about those he possibly heard talking about and/or insisting on an even stronger eligibility clause which might have precluded him from ever becoming a President, since we know that Hamilton7 was not born in the United States. But in the end he need not have worried about that since the grandfather clause covering the “original Citizens” would have exempted him from the ultimate much more restrictive ‘birth status’ term put into the new Constitution.
As the end product in Article II Section 1 Clause 5, the presidential eligibility clause8 of our adopted and ratified Constitution of the United States shows that somewhat more restrictive term of simply being “born a Citizen”, rather than being simply any “Citizen”, was NOT accepted either as being strong enough to block foreign influence by birth on who would be a future President. And thus those who argue today that being “born a Citizen” is all that is required as to citizenship status to be eligible to run for the office of President are clearly wrong! The founders and framers considered it and it did not make it into the final adopted Constitution or into any of the ratified subsequent first 10 Amendments9 put up to help get the new Constitution ratified by the several states. History shows that simply being “born a Citizen” was proposed by Hamilton and it was not accepted. What can be more demonstrative than that of “originalist” understanding and intent that simply being “born a Citizen” is NOT eligibility enough to be the President!
What even more restrictive term as to citizenship status did they choose and “Where” and “Who” did the delegates get the suggestion from? We learn from history and the records in our Library of Congress that in a letter10 dated 25 Jul 1787 from John Jay11 (who later became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court under the new Constitution) sent to George Washington12, the presiding President of the Constitutional Convention (and who had been the Commander in Chief of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War and who later became the first President of the United States under the new Constitution), wherein John Jay suggested the much more restrictive term and “kind”13 of Citizenship which is obtained only from Natural Law14 and the Laws of Nature and Nature’s Creator and not from positive, man-made, resolutions, statutory laws, treaties or amendments, that is requiring the future Presidents to be a “natural born Citizen”15, a person born in the country to parents (plural – father and mother) who were both Citizens (born or naturalized Citizens but both Citizens of some “kind”) of the country when their child was born in the country. Born in the country of a father who is a Citizen of the country and the mother is a Citizen of the country form the Three Legged Stool Test16 for a “natural born Citizen”. Without either leg it cannot stand.
This Natural Law term provides for sole allegiance and unity of citizenship at birth to only one country. No “dual-Citizenship at birth” person would be permitted to be a future President and Commander in Chief of our military. Thus, the key “Who” that were the essential and key people in getting the Natural Law “natural born Citizen” term put into the adopted Constitution of the United States17 are John Jay and George Washington. Knowing “Who” the key people where who put the “natural born Citizen” term into the new Constitution, and their backgrounds and roles in the revolution and in the formation and early governance of our new nation, will help us much more clearly understand the reason “Why” that Natural Law strongly restrictive ‘status at birth term’ of “natural born Citizen” was selected instead of the less restrictive “born a Citizen” and simply a “Citizen” terms. We will discuss this again later in the “Why” section of this paper.
What: The “What” of course is the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution. (See End Note 8)
When: The summer of 178718. (See End Note 2)
Where: The physical location “Where” they made the choices and decisions as to what went into our Constitution and what did not was at Independence Hall during the Constitutional Convention held in Philadelphia, PA.19
But “Where” intellectually did John Jay get the term “natural born Citizen” and his understanding of the strong check on foreign influence and restrictive citizenship “kind” it was? He got it from Natural Law and the enlightenment movement of Europe writing about the natural rights of man and about new forms of government of which the founders and framers where readers, students, and followers and in particular the preeminent legal treatise of the time on the principles of Natural Law, “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” by Emer de Vattel (1758/1775). That legal treatise was widely read and put to use by the founders and framers in justifying the revolution and writing the founding documents20.
Why: When John Jay suggested about being careful about the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national government in his 25 July 1787 letter to George Washington, who was presiding over the Constitutional Convention in the summer of 1787, John Jay was telling George Washington, and by us reading that letter, telling all of us the “Why” he was suggesting to George Washington that the presidential eligibility clause be made much more restrictive. He wrote suggesting in order to help prevent foreign influence on the future Presidents, who under the new Constitution would also be the Commander in Chief of our military the new Constitution should provide a “strong check” against foreign influence via birth on the person who would be in command of our military. John Jay wrote that “the Command in chief of the American armies shall not be given, nor devolve on, any but at natural born Citizen”. And since the President was going to be the Commander in Chief of our military the President had to be a “natural born Citizen”. It was a national security concern. That is “Why” the “natural born Citizen” term is in the presidential eligibility clause. The term was selected for national security protection reasons to specifically keep persons born with foreign citizenship and divided allegiances at birth, and/or aka dual-Citizens at birth, from ever constitutionally being eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of our military. We must respect and enforce the original understanding, meaning, and intent – the “Why”!
George Washington replied21 by letter to John Jay appreciating his “hint” and within the next draft of our U.S. Constitution we see the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause. Of course they had to include a ‘grandfather clause’ to exempt their current generation, the founding generation, since none of the “original Citizens’ were “natural born Citizens”. The “natural born Citizens” are the children born in the country of “Citizens”. Most of the “original Citizens” were born British Subjects and were in effect self-naturalized into being “original Citizens” by being the founding members of the newly created nation via the 1776 Declaration of Independence and adhering to the Revolution. Historian David Ramsay of the founding generation wrote an excellent paper in 1789 on who were the “original Citizens”22
...............................................
View the complete Birther Report presentation, including comments, at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2016/02...hy-and_28.html
Birther Report
2/28/2016
Excerpt:
The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term In Our United States Constitution 1
By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired)
28 February 2016
Who: The various sovereign, free, and independent several states, as a result of the revolution against England had loosely banded together in a confederation to battle England and thus formed the new United States in 1776. In 1787 they decided to convene a convention of the states to draw up a Constitution to form a stronger, “more perfect” union and appointed delegates from their several states for that purpose. The delegates met in the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, PA to write the new contract. While there, the delegates considered, among many things, the eligibility qualifications for who could be the President of the new stronger more perfectly unified United States under the in-draft and newly proposed Constitution of the United States2.
Early on they considered requiring the President to be only a “Citizen”3. Being very concerned about foreign intrigue and influence entering into the halls of power this was thought not to be a strong enough protection against foreign influence4 on the person who would hold the singularly most powerful office under the proposed new Constitution. Then as is mentioned in Madison’s notes5 of the Constitution Convention proceedings, Alexander Hamilton at some points in time had proposed to the various delegates that for the office of President, that the person being simply and only a “Citizen” would be fine for the founding generation who were the “original Citizens”, and who had shed their blood in the cause of forming the new nation, but that in the future after the new Constitution was adopted and once the founding generation was gone, the President would have to have stronger allegiance to the nation and be “born a Citizen”6, which today is more commonly called in U.S. Statutory Laws a “Citizen at or by Birth”. Hamilton may have been concerned about those he possibly heard talking about and/or insisting on an even stronger eligibility clause which might have precluded him from ever becoming a President, since we know that Hamilton7 was not born in the United States. But in the end he need not have worried about that since the grandfather clause covering the “original Citizens” would have exempted him from the ultimate much more restrictive ‘birth status’ term put into the new Constitution.
As the end product in Article II Section 1 Clause 5, the presidential eligibility clause8 of our adopted and ratified Constitution of the United States shows that somewhat more restrictive term of simply being “born a Citizen”, rather than being simply any “Citizen”, was NOT accepted either as being strong enough to block foreign influence by birth on who would be a future President. And thus those who argue today that being “born a Citizen” is all that is required as to citizenship status to be eligible to run for the office of President are clearly wrong! The founders and framers considered it and it did not make it into the final adopted Constitution or into any of the ratified subsequent first 10 Amendments9 put up to help get the new Constitution ratified by the several states. History shows that simply being “born a Citizen” was proposed by Hamilton and it was not accepted. What can be more demonstrative than that of “originalist” understanding and intent that simply being “born a Citizen” is NOT eligibility enough to be the President!
What even more restrictive term as to citizenship status did they choose and “Where” and “Who” did the delegates get the suggestion from? We learn from history and the records in our Library of Congress that in a letter10 dated 25 Jul 1787 from John Jay11 (who later became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court under the new Constitution) sent to George Washington12, the presiding President of the Constitutional Convention (and who had been the Commander in Chief of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War and who later became the first President of the United States under the new Constitution), wherein John Jay suggested the much more restrictive term and “kind”13 of Citizenship which is obtained only from Natural Law14 and the Laws of Nature and Nature’s Creator and not from positive, man-made, resolutions, statutory laws, treaties or amendments, that is requiring the future Presidents to be a “natural born Citizen”15, a person born in the country to parents (plural – father and mother) who were both Citizens (born or naturalized Citizens but both Citizens of some “kind”) of the country when their child was born in the country. Born in the country of a father who is a Citizen of the country and the mother is a Citizen of the country form the Three Legged Stool Test16 for a “natural born Citizen”. Without either leg it cannot stand.
This Natural Law term provides for sole allegiance and unity of citizenship at birth to only one country. No “dual-Citizenship at birth” person would be permitted to be a future President and Commander in Chief of our military. Thus, the key “Who” that were the essential and key people in getting the Natural Law “natural born Citizen” term put into the adopted Constitution of the United States17 are John Jay and George Washington. Knowing “Who” the key people where who put the “natural born Citizen” term into the new Constitution, and their backgrounds and roles in the revolution and in the formation and early governance of our new nation, will help us much more clearly understand the reason “Why” that Natural Law strongly restrictive ‘status at birth term’ of “natural born Citizen” was selected instead of the less restrictive “born a Citizen” and simply a “Citizen” terms. We will discuss this again later in the “Why” section of this paper.
What: The “What” of course is the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution. (See End Note 8)
When: The summer of 178718. (See End Note 2)
Where: The physical location “Where” they made the choices and decisions as to what went into our Constitution and what did not was at Independence Hall during the Constitutional Convention held in Philadelphia, PA.19
But “Where” intellectually did John Jay get the term “natural born Citizen” and his understanding of the strong check on foreign influence and restrictive citizenship “kind” it was? He got it from Natural Law and the enlightenment movement of Europe writing about the natural rights of man and about new forms of government of which the founders and framers where readers, students, and followers and in particular the preeminent legal treatise of the time on the principles of Natural Law, “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” by Emer de Vattel (1758/1775). That legal treatise was widely read and put to use by the founders and framers in justifying the revolution and writing the founding documents20.
Why: When John Jay suggested about being careful about the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national government in his 25 July 1787 letter to George Washington, who was presiding over the Constitutional Convention in the summer of 1787, John Jay was telling George Washington, and by us reading that letter, telling all of us the “Why” he was suggesting to George Washington that the presidential eligibility clause be made much more restrictive. He wrote suggesting in order to help prevent foreign influence on the future Presidents, who under the new Constitution would also be the Commander in Chief of our military the new Constitution should provide a “strong check” against foreign influence via birth on the person who would be in command of our military. John Jay wrote that “the Command in chief of the American armies shall not be given, nor devolve on, any but at natural born Citizen”. And since the President was going to be the Commander in Chief of our military the President had to be a “natural born Citizen”. It was a national security concern. That is “Why” the “natural born Citizen” term is in the presidential eligibility clause. The term was selected for national security protection reasons to specifically keep persons born with foreign citizenship and divided allegiances at birth, and/or aka dual-Citizens at birth, from ever constitutionally being eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of our military. We must respect and enforce the original understanding, meaning, and intent – the “Why”!
George Washington replied21 by letter to John Jay appreciating his “hint” and within the next draft of our U.S. Constitution we see the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause. Of course they had to include a ‘grandfather clause’ to exempt their current generation, the founding generation, since none of the “original Citizens’ were “natural born Citizens”. The “natural born Citizens” are the children born in the country of “Citizens”. Most of the “original Citizens” were born British Subjects and were in effect self-naturalized into being “original Citizens” by being the founding members of the newly created nation via the 1776 Declaration of Independence and adhering to the Revolution. Historian David Ramsay of the founding generation wrote an excellent paper in 1789 on who were the “original Citizens”22
...............................................
View the complete Birther Report presentation, including comments, at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2016/02...hy-and_28.html