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. That also includes people who are born in Puerto Rico and people who were born in states before they became states. Born in Hawaii in 1950, a decade before statehood? You're a natural born U.S. citizen.

That is how legal experts interpret the "natural born" requirement.. and how you get that status is actually pretty open. Until the Supreme Court weighs in on this issue (and there are no plans that we know of that that will happen)... -- to your emails... Senator Marco Rubio and Governor Bobby Jindal are both eligible to run and become Vice President or President.

Email Bret's lackey at katyricalde@yahoo.com and tell them to educate themselves! http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

A Harvard educated attorney and 30-year constitutional scholar explains below what a natural born Citizen is.

Herbert W. Titus is of counsel to the law firm of William J. Olson, P.C. Prior to his association with this firm, Mr. Titus taught constitutional law, common law, and other subjects for nearly 30 years at five different American Bar Association approved law schools. From 1986 to 1993, he served as the founding Dean of the College of Law and Government in Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia. Prior to his academic career, he served as a Trial Attorney and a Special Assistant United States Attorney with the United States Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. and Kansas City, Missouri. Today he is engaged in a general practice with a concentration in constitutional strategy, litigation, and appeals.

Mr. Titus holds the J.D. degree (cum laude) from Harvard and the B.S. degree in Political Science from the University of Oregon from which he graduated Phi Beta Kappa. He is an active member of the bar of Virginia and an inactive member of the bar of Oregon. He is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the United States Court of Claims, and the United States Courts of Appeals for the Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, District of Columbia and Federal Circuits. His constitutional practice has taken him into federal district courts in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia and the state courts of Idaho, Texas and North Dakota.

I believe that comments are disabled on the t article.

The brouhaha over President Obama's birth certificate -- has revealed a widespread ignorance of some of the basics of American citizenship.

Its like being booted and banned from the Mouseketeers, being excommunicated by the Pope ! Or worse - Its like hearing on the Grand Old Opry broadcast that your songs ain't country, they are lousy fakes - and that they will not get any attention from C&W producers, labels, honky-tonks, radio stations, or record shops.

Yowzahh ! That's the biggest megaphone in ConservoWorld, reaching the most RWers, right down to Granny in the old folks homes and to almost all of their conspiracy kooks - and FOX has sent their pundits to smack down the birthers most prized claims !

Citizen Wells says "Have Obama thugs threatened Fox?"

and they're off. . . .

http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2012/05/ ... uirements/

Mario is in damage control mode. http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/05/fox-n ... ation.html

Mario is in damage control mode. http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/05/fox-n ... ation.html

While the Constitution itself does not define a "natural born Citizen," historical evidence and case law from the U.S. Supreme Court and other courts do so. That evidence shows that a "natural born Citizen" is a child born in the United States to parents who at the time of their birth were both either "natural born Citizens" or "citizens of the United States." See my blog at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/ for a discussion of this historical evidence and case law.

[...]

What Minor said about a “natural born Citizen” was confirmed in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (acknowledging and confirming Minor’s American common law definition of a “natural-born citizen” but adding based on the English common law that since “‘[t]he child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle [birth in the country]’” (bracketed information supplied), a child born in the United States to domiciled alien parents was a Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States”). This American common law definition of a “natural born Citizen” has never been changed, not even by the Fourteenth Amendment (only uses the clause "citizen of the United States" and does not mention "natural born Citizen") or Wong Kim Ark, and therefore still prevails today. Both those U.S. Supreme Court cases define a "natural born Citizen" as a child born in a country to parents who are citizens of that country. Hence, it is Mr. Baier who needs a U.S. Supreme Court decision to change the current status of the law, not us who know what the law is.

FYI, Mario is posting there if anyone is interested.

The stupid is really strong over there.

Anonymous said...[Reply]

Wong Kim Ark:

“…and his child… ‘If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…”

Justice Gray does a very revealing compare and contrast here:

- he compares two children

- on the one hand, he mentions the US born child of a resident alien

- on the other hand, he mentions the “natural-born” child of a citizen

Justice Gray clearly states that only one is natural-born: the child of the citizen.

Anonymous said...[Reply]

WONG KIM ARK SAYS THAT A NONCITIZEN'S CHILD BORN ON US SOIL IS AS MUCH A CITIZEN AS THE NATURAL BORN CHILD OF A CITIZEN BORN ON US SOIL.

GOT IT DUMBOTS???
WKA holds that an alien parent makes the child NOT a natural born citizen.

"Every citizen or subject of another country if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…’