Tweet
FOX NEWS’ BAIER TYPIFIES MAINSTREAM ERRANCY ON NATURAL BORN ELIGIBILITY
The Daily Pen
Dan Crosby
5/2/2012
Excerpt:
Fox News correspondent, Bret Baier, joins an increasing roster of errant-minded media mainstreamers who have assigned an incorrect and biased definition of Natural Born citizenship in a desperate attempt to uphold transient political values and profiteering for a few over constitutional sovereignty and legal protection for many.
"NEW YORK, NY – Fox News’ Bret Baier is the latest pundit to miss the presidential eligibility mark when writing in his Fox website blog, The Daily Bret, he attempted to incorrectly equate a “citizen by birth” with a “natural born citizen”.
Baier writes, “Many legal analysts and scholars agree with this take-- and until the Supreme Court weighs in.. this is how the law is interpreted: The Constitution requires that the president be a "natural born citizen," but does not define the term. That job is left to federal law, in 8 U.S. Code, Section 1401. All the law requires is that the mother be an American citizen who has lived in the U.S. for five years or more, at least two of those years after the age of 14. If the mother fits those criteria, the child is a U.S. citizen at birth, regardless of the father's nationality.
The law lists several categories of people who are considered American citizens at birth. There are the people born inside the United States; no question there. There are the people who are born outside the United States to parents who are both citizens, provided one of them has lived in the U.S. for any period of time. There are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is a U.S. national (that is, from an outlying possession of the U.S.), provided the citizen parent has lived in the United States or its possessions for at least one year prior to the birth of the child. And then there are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is an alien, provided the citizen parent lived in the United States or its possessions for at least five years, two of them after the age of 14.
They're all natural born U.S. citizens…”
Unfortunately, Baier is wrong and misguided. Those he defines here are not Natural born citizens. A natural born U.S. citizen is one born in the United States, specifically defined as a geographic location held under the constitutional protection of the U.S., to two U.S. citizen parents, conditions which are well defined by the tenets of natural law and national identity.
“Again, this is another example of a politically-minded individual desperately seeking an extralegal mooring upon which to anchor their opinion about Obama’s eligibility. Unfortunately for Baier, that mooring is not found there,” says TDP Editor, Pen Johannson.
The commonly understood meaning of the terms in effect within the societies adjacent to the writing of the U.S. Constitution, which were understood by the framers of the Constitution to be facts of natural law, assigned natural born U.S. citizenship status based on laws of nature, not laws of man. Therefore, Baier’s attribution that Natural Born citizenship can be conferred by such a law is simply wrong. Natural born citizenship cannot be endowed by a law of man, it can only be agreed with or rejected with consequences.
It appears Baier is rejecting the constitution, not agreeing with it."
........................................
View the complete article at:
http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012...ainstream.html
The Daily Pen
Dan Crosby
5/2/2012
Excerpt:
Fox News correspondent, Bret Baier, joins an increasing roster of errant-minded media mainstreamers who have assigned an incorrect and biased definition of Natural Born citizenship in a desperate attempt to uphold transient political values and profiteering for a few over constitutional sovereignty and legal protection for many.
"NEW YORK, NY – Fox News’ Bret Baier is the latest pundit to miss the presidential eligibility mark when writing in his Fox website blog, The Daily Bret, he attempted to incorrectly equate a “citizen by birth” with a “natural born citizen”.
Baier writes, “Many legal analysts and scholars agree with this take-- and until the Supreme Court weighs in.. this is how the law is interpreted: The Constitution requires that the president be a "natural born citizen," but does not define the term. That job is left to federal law, in 8 U.S. Code, Section 1401. All the law requires is that the mother be an American citizen who has lived in the U.S. for five years or more, at least two of those years after the age of 14. If the mother fits those criteria, the child is a U.S. citizen at birth, regardless of the father's nationality.
The law lists several categories of people who are considered American citizens at birth. There are the people born inside the United States; no question there. There are the people who are born outside the United States to parents who are both citizens, provided one of them has lived in the U.S. for any period of time. There are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is a U.S. national (that is, from an outlying possession of the U.S.), provided the citizen parent has lived in the United States or its possessions for at least one year prior to the birth of the child. And then there are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is an alien, provided the citizen parent lived in the United States or its possessions for at least five years, two of them after the age of 14.
They're all natural born U.S. citizens…”
Unfortunately, Baier is wrong and misguided. Those he defines here are not Natural born citizens. A natural born U.S. citizen is one born in the United States, specifically defined as a geographic location held under the constitutional protection of the U.S., to two U.S. citizen parents, conditions which are well defined by the tenets of natural law and national identity.
“Again, this is another example of a politically-minded individual desperately seeking an extralegal mooring upon which to anchor their opinion about Obama’s eligibility. Unfortunately for Baier, that mooring is not found there,” says TDP Editor, Pen Johannson.
The commonly understood meaning of the terms in effect within the societies adjacent to the writing of the U.S. Constitution, which were understood by the framers of the Constitution to be facts of natural law, assigned natural born U.S. citizenship status based on laws of nature, not laws of man. Therefore, Baier’s attribution that Natural Born citizenship can be conferred by such a law is simply wrong. Natural born citizenship cannot be endowed by a law of man, it can only be agreed with or rejected with consequences.
It appears Baier is rejecting the constitution, not agreeing with it."
........................................
View the complete article at:
http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012...ainstream.html