by CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret), blogging at CDRKerchner, ©2023
(Mar. 18, 2023) — (17 Mar 2023) — Regarding the term “natural born citizen” (NBC) in our U.S. Constitution’s presidential eligibility clause and Principles of Natural Law, it is not a very limited club and category of citizenship. In fact it is exactly the opposite. NBCs are the most common, garden variety, most populous group or kind of citizenship that exists in a typical nation and is typically by far the most populous kind, group, or class of citizenship in virtually all nations.
Thus in our United States, we have a very, very large pool of NBCs from which to choose a President and Command in Chief of our military. We don’t need to search the ranks of those with foreign allegiances and foreign influence and foreign powers claims on them by birth such as Barack Hussein Obama and Kamala Harris have. The pool of NBCs is vast in our nation. As in this article’s title and analogy: “Natural Born Citizens Are The 3 Leaf Clover Kind of Citizens Not The 4 Leaf Clover Kind”, they are not rare but the most frequently occurring type in nature and a nation.” Those that are born in the country to two citizens (natural born, born, or naturalized citizens themselves) of the country when their child is born in the country, i.e., the “natural born citizens” are the largest group/kind of citizens in this country and in any nation. The natural born Citizen’s values and traditions in general define the culture of a nation.
An idea: Go buy a three leaf clover pin and pin it on your lapel. And when people ask you why you are wearing a three leaf clover pin, tell them what it signifies about being a “natural born citizen” of the United States and that Obama, Harris, Haley, Ramaswamy, Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal and some others seek high national office are not. Then explain why. Because their fathers were not a U.S. citizen when Obama or the others listed were born. They do not pass the “Three Legged Stool Test” for being a “natural born Citizen” of the United States.
In fact, for example, Obama’s father was not even an immigrant to the USA and was never even a permanent resident here. Obama’s father Obama Sr. was a foreigner simply sojourning here for a couple years on a student or diplomatic visa. And then he went home to Kenya.
Thus Barack Hussein Obama Jr. was born to a non-U.S. citizen, non-immigrant, foreigner father and was thus born with foreign influence on him and foreign citizenship via his father in the truest sense of the meaning of that terminology as it was intended to mean and used by John Jay in his letter to General George Washington about what kind of citizen and what type of citizenship is required to serve as the President and Commander in Chief of our Army for our new nation in the future. And General Washington agreed that it should only be a “natural born Citizen” of the new nation, for this singular most powerful office in our new nation, with the grandfather clause put into Article II of that requirement to exempt the generation there at the time the Constitution was adopted.
Read the rest here.
Dittos CDR Charles F. Kerchner,
John Jay would probably agree with only “three leaf clover kind of citizens” being a “natural born Citizen” with eligibility to be president.
Also, I think that John Jay would probably agree with my 7 “only” requirements for eligibility to be president, all derived from analyzing why he underlined the word “born” in “natural born Citizen” in his July 25, 1787 note to his friend George Washington who was presiding over the constitutional convention which adopted Article II Section 1 clause 5 and the entire Constitution on September 17, 1787.
1. only singular U. S. citizenship
2. only by birth alone
3. only on U. S. soil
4. only to two U. S. citizens
5. only married
6. only to each other
7. only before a child is born
If anybody disagrees with the 7 “only” points which endorse Jay’s reason for underling the word “born”, well, they have another think coming until they get it right.
If Jay meant “born” with singular or dual citizenship, “born” on U. S. or foreign soil, “born” to one or two U. S. citizens who were married or not married (in 1787 “not” ??? married) only to each other only before a child is born (or not married to anybody), they have a whole ‘lotta ‘splaining to do to common sense thinkers who understand “born” to imply ONLY one thing, not more than one thing.
Tulsi Gabbard is another one who is a basic Citizen at Birth but not a “natural born Citizen” at Birth. Adjectives mean something. See: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2011/07/07/trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab-are-nbc-2/
Tulsi Gabbard was born in Samoa, a U.S. independently governed territory, and her father was Samoan and was per U.S. law a “U.S. National” per man-made naturalization law, i.e., Title 8 Section 1401, a group naturalization act of Congress (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401) but her father was not a U.S. Citizen under that law, just a U.S. National.
Tulsi’s claim to basic U.S. Citizenship is via her citizen mother. But since her father was not a U.S. Citizen, she is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States, that is a person born in the USA to parents who were both citizens of the USA when their child was born.
Also of great concern, Tulsi Gabbard, while talking the right talk lately on national TV and elsewhere about what is wrong with our country, has a history and past of being associated with and part of the communist far-leftist activists and their agenda to get the country into the bad shape it is today. See: https://www.worldviewweekend.com/tv/video/worldview-radio-trevor-loudon-why-conservatives-should-remember-communist-ties-tulsi — I do not trust her. To me she is trying to work her was into the populist movement camp as an infiltrator and influencer in order to gain a position of power at which point she would imo work to undermine Trump in the 2024 election cycle.
Yes. Tulsi Gabbard is a STATUTORY U.S. citizen by positive (man-made) law and there is nothing natural about that.
The Natural Born Citizen clause is about allegiance to the United States which was made clear in Jay’s letter. When the fledgling republic was created the Framers were deeply concerned about foreign influence and wanted to ensure that the Presidency was only for citizens with 100% allegiance to the United States.
Thus they inserted the Natural Born Citizen clause but exempted the individuals at the adopt of the constitution because they knew it was likely to take a generation to create these in essence Super Americans.
Individuals born or later acquiring foreign citizenship aren’t dual citizens for they are subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign country, which by the way isn’t optional, the United States mandates dual citizenship obey the laws of both nations to which they have citizenship, the exact divide loyalties the framers were concerned about. This is why Barry Soetoro wasn’t eligible, the whole birth certificate issue was to distract from this.
The academic elites don’t like the clause and thus have come out with phony meanings like the 14th amendment makes one a Natural Born Citizen that’s 100% wrong it only makes one a citizen but not a Natural Born Citizen. Native Americans were not granted citizenship when the 14th was passed for they were subject to tribal jurisdiction.
The problem is that Obama was allowed to serve so now every non-natural born citizen thinks they can do it too. It’s going to take a very courageous candidate to force the courts to define the term once and for all.