Natural Born Citizen

I thought this thread was going to be an argument of natural born citizens VS contractual citizens of the US.

Now I am disappointed

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: Annee

The ones born here.

Get it the natural born children

Not children of foreign diplomats. As far as I know.

But, what does Natural Born citizen have to do with Dreamers?

yea there is something bout that in the naturalization act of 1790 but the 14 amendment gives any child born here citizenship

a reply to: howtonhawky

So if you know this. What is the point of your thread?

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ
I thought this thread was going to be an argument of natural born citizens VS contractual citizens of the US.

Now I am disappointed

that is fine with me if we go that direction too

what is a contractual citizen?
looking

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: howtonhawky

So if you know this. What is the point of your thread?

points come and go

so far the main point seems to be that most americans are being duped into believing that this daca covers kids born here and their nuclear families just as was stated by the current potus

now it is turning out to be a lie and most daca are people not born here?

america needs to know

a reply to: howtonhawky

I have to disagree with you. You can't speak for most Americans just because you didn't realize what DACA is. The ONLY people qualified for DACA are kids brought here before the age of 16. You can find a simple definition using google.

I will concede, with this thread as proof, that some people don't comprehend what's happening in our country.

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: Annee

The ones born here.

Get it the natural born children

Not children of foreign diplomats. As far as I know.

But, what does Natural Born citizen have to do with Dreamers?

yea there is something bout that in the naturalization act of 1790 but the 14 amendment gives any child born here citizenship

Yes. Actually, you are correct.

In researching -- recently, because of current happenings -- the 14th Ammendment has been clarified to include ALL children -- no matter the status of their parents.

a reply to: Bluntone22


It's perfectly logical, because how else would you do it?

You are a citizen to where you were born, if you want to switch, you have to do paper work. You don't do paper work, you are a criminal,

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: howtonhawky


I will concede, with this thread as proof, that some people don't comprehend what's happening in our country.

And we're on ATS, where most are a bit better informed on some topics. So if there is confusion here, imagine what the "regular" folk think! Add to that that way too many people still consume and believe everything the MSM says and you have a recipe for disaster. Which is exactly where our society is these days.

a reply to: KansasGirl

yep
it never hurts to clarify things a bit.

I just assumed that the daca deal was based on something other than feelings

Could anyone from the states please confirm or refute my musings that if Meghan and Prince Harry had a child born there that the child could stand for president?

That would be funny as! The UK royal family regaining control, in theory of course.



I ask because I don't want to be off topic so would like to start an interesting 'what if?' thread if it is theoretically possible. My searches trying to interpret US constitutional legislation haven't helped me much being a stupid commie Brit.

originally posted by: Annee
Except for children of foreign diplomats. They do not qualify as natural born citizens of US.

Is the blood of Foreign Diplomats magical? Must not be Muggles.

I never knew that.

Such a strange concept.

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
You are mistaken about what DACA is.
It's to help people who were brought into the US as kids. Not people born in the US.

But, many of these immigrants are claiming they were "born again" while being here in the USA.

And as Jesus said, unless a person is born again, he has no life in him.

So, their true birth was indeed inside the United States.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Annee
Except for children of foreign diplomats. They do not qualify as natural born citizens of US.

Is the blood of Foreign Diplomats magical? Must not be Muggles.

I never knew that.

Such a strange concept.

Not any more.

Because of current happenings -- 14th has been confirmed/clarified. Any child born on US soil is a natural born citizen.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Annee
Except for children of foreign diplomats. They do not qualify as natural born citizens of US.

Is the blood of Foreign Diplomats magical? Must not be Muggles.

I never knew that.

Such a strange concept.

Not any more.

Because of current happenings -- 14th has been confirmed/clarified. Any child born on US soil is a natural born citizen.

So could Meghan and Prince Harry have a child born in the states who could stand for POTUS election?
Could the British Crown regain control legally through the ballot box?

a reply to: howtonhawky

I think the drafters were deferring to 'natural law' when they wrote the term 'natural born citizen' in the U.S. Constitution.

Natural law (Latin: ius naturale, lex naturalis) is a philosophy asserting that certain rights are inherent by virtue of human nature, endowed by nature—traditionally by God or a transcendent source—and that these can be understood universally through human reason. As determined by nature, the law of nature is implied to be universal existing independently of the positive law of a given state, political order, legislature or society at large.

So, no positive (written) definition applies. That would include the 14th Amendment.

If another nation can claim a child as a citizen, at birth, then the child is not a natural born citizen of the United States. (That includes me, being that I was born a dual U.S./Canadian citizen.)

It would also mean that defining 'natural born citizen' is OUTSIDE of the Supreme Court's jurisdiction given that they are charged with *interpreting* the positive laws written in the U.S. Constitution.

Of course, I freely admit this is only my opinion.

There is no one definition of 'natural born citizen.' The definition is unique to the circumstances of every child born in the U.S. and/or to U.S. citizen parent(s).

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Annee
Except for children of foreign diplomats. They do not qualify as natural born citizens of US.

Is the blood of Foreign Diplomats magical? Must not be Muggles.

I never knew that.

Such a strange concept.

Not any more.

Because of current happenings -- 14th has been confirmed/clarified. Any child born on US soil is a natural born citizen.

But the 14th Amendment is positive law (written). Therefore, it is not 'natural' law. The 14th Amendment doesn't dictate 'natural law.'

People just disregard the word 'natural' like there was not any intention behind it.

wow there are some pretty cool interpretations/opinions here in this thread.
very much for one to ponder.
I am thanking you all.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Annee
Except for children of foreign diplomats. They do not qualify as natural born citizens of US.

Is the blood of Foreign Diplomats magical? Must not be Muggles.

I never knew that.

Such a strange concept.

Not any more.

Because of current happenings -- 14th has been confirmed/clarified. Any child born on US soil is a natural born citizen.

But the 14th Amendment is positive law (written). Therefore, it is not 'natural' law. The 14th Amendment doesn't dictate 'natural law.'

People just disregard the word 'natural' like there was not any intention behind it.

IMO - - there is issue with the Constitution and Amendments - - - written 150 to 230 years ago.

They basically (have to) work as a framework - - - with clarification updates to be effectively current.

This is apparently happening right now - - - because of the current "climate" of immigrant status.

What "was" is not anymore.

From what I've been reading - - - a "hard line" has been drawn in the sand. Born on US soil - - - you are a natural born citizen - - PERIOD! (may not be true of territories)

Also, born in foreign country to US military parent (not clear on if born to non-military parent).

a reply to: Annee

What I like about the position I take, is that it takes into consideration that U.S. citizenship is not necessarily something desirable.

In fact, U.S. citizenship is not always automatically acquired at birth -- even on U.S. soil. For example:

8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(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;

Link

So when you wrote:

From what I've been reading - - - a "hard line" has been drawn in the sand. Born on US soil - - - you are a natural born citizen - - PERIOD! (may not be true of territories)

It isn't a hard line, and it's not that simple.

Throw out that feeling of American exceptionalism...our government has no authority to decide natural law.

***

ETA: And, fun fact, Obama's father/grandfather/etc. were members of an aboriginal tribe: The Luo. I don't know how the tribe's membership works or if Obama's U.S. citizenship had any effect on his tribal property rights, but it's interesting. Too bad no one was able to discuss any of this when he was president...or now since I've been told "it doesn't matter anymore, he's not president."