obama headshot
By: Amil Imani with James H. Hyde

 


In our previous article, "Exonerating President Obama", we noted that the only Supreme Court precedent for the meaning of the term “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution appears to be the Judge Harlan dissent in the United States v. Wong Kim Ark case.  In collaboration with a constitutional attorney, we have examined the subject matter further.

We believe that to understand the complexity of this issue it will be essential to have an understanding of the place that the concepts of “Natural Law” and the book titled Law of Nations had obtained in the run up to the War of Independence with Great Britain. These concepts of natural law were commonly used throughout the colonies to explain, defend and justify the colonists’ contentions in our dispute with Great Britain. Our investigation leaves no doubt that the Founding Fathers of our nation clearly understood the meaning of the term “natural born Citizen” and its relation to Natural Law and Law of Nations. When you have finished studying our research you will also understand that these terms were used in the Declaration of Independence as well as in our Constitution and in the constitutions of a large number of states written at the same time as the Constitutional Convention was in session.

This background understanding will clarify why the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention elected to include “natural born Citizen” in the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President of our nation and what it truly means.

In this article we will prove beyond all doubt that Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born Citizen and is thus ineligible to be President of the United States.

Citations following the textual part of this article are not simply to provide you the references that support our assertions. They also provide you citations to reading material that will help you understand the 1770 period in our History. To understand our reasoning, it is important that the reader understands the Colonial people, and especially the Founders with their educational backgrounds, their political fears and the nation's interrelationship with other nations at the time leading up to the War of Independence. In this short article we could not provide all those dimensions, but we hope the reader will study the references to fully understand the time period during which these things took place. Unfortunately there are citations to books which are not available to download online, so to get the whole picture, the reader will need to find a library to borrow the needed materials.

1. In the time frame of 1740—1790, “Natural Law” had grown from the 17th century studies of the early enlightenment philosophers (Grotius, Pufendorf, Rousseau, Locke, de Wolf) into a reason-based concept that was based on the fact that all humans have inherent animal qualities that contribute to laws worldwide that are essentially the same.

2. Emer de Vattel, a Swiss scholar, published a now world famous work titled Law of Nations in French in 1758.  The Vattel work built upon the earlier philosophy of Natural Law, especially that of de Wolf.  But what made Vattel’s work so famous was his adoption of a more modern and easier-to-understand format, which was written like a scientific thesis. It started out with definitions that were worked into the initial textual material in a manner very different from the heavy, incomprehensible writing style of the earlier philosophers. His work is written like a modern do-it-yourself project where he captured the entire history and essence of Natural Law but mixed it into a means to build a new nation based on a new type of constitution or a way of establishing an acceptable set of rules for running a nation in a common sense manner based on the experience of political science as it developed over the centuries.

3. The delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention understood what they were voting on when they voted unanimously on Sept. 7, 1787 to add a clause to Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the Presidential Eligibility Requirements. They had added an eligibility clause for anyone seeking the Office of the President that requires that they be a “natural born Citizen,” which means that both of his parents had to be citizens of the U.S. on the date of his birth.

4. In the period 1750-1770, the French language had become of growing interest in the world of American politics and had been of major importance to the academic world, especially for American attorneys and in particular how it relates to Natural Law in the time period 1730 and thereafter.

5.  The great majority of the delegates at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 were attorneys and at that time attorneys were primarily men from the upper classes who were typically very well educated at the few colleges and universities of merit in the U.S. For the most part the educational curricula in those schools followed the Classical Education model of Great Britain.

 

Second shot6. (a) After 1750, many leaders in the U.S. had become aware that the Classical Educational Model was not adequate for the times. This resulted in movements to modernize the curricula of American colleges and universities, in particular to introduce a new emphasis on the teaching of Law in the colleges and universities as opposed to the traditional apprenticeship programs being employed to qualify attorneys. Specifically, for many years prior to 1789, Thomas Jefferson, the then Governor of Virginia, had tried to pass a law in Virginia that would have placed William and Mary, an Anglican facility, in charge of the Virginia State University system and to modernize the curriculum. While his efforts were unsuccessful because of opposition from other church groups, Jefferson was instrumental in abolishing the Greek and Hebrew Professorships at William and Mary and initiating courses in Natural Law and Political Science; likewise, the College of Philadelphia (now Pennsylvania University) had initiated similar changes in the time period 1760-1780 which focused more specifically on legal areas, including Natural Law, to better prepare students to become attorneys. In the time period 1760-1780, the College of New Jersey (now Princeton) was only getting started with the new curriculum and was extremely focused on being a modern, more flexible educational facility compared to universities utilizing the Classical Model. Harvard and Yale were less rapid in modernizing in the time period 1760-1780, except that each had added the study of the French Language to their curricula.

6. (b) John Jay, subsequently the first  Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, had written a letter on July 25, 1787, to George Washington, who was then the President of the Constitutional Convention, which was in session.  In this letter, John Jay expressed a fear for the nation if the office of the President should fall into the hands of a person with an allegiance to a foreign power. To reduce the chance for this from occurring Mr. Jay recommended including the provision in the President’s Eligibility Requirements that the President must be a “natural born Citizen” in addition to the other age eligibility and term of residency requirements that would suffice to adequately protect the nation from a person with a foreign allegiance from ever becoming President.

6. (c) From the floor of the Constitutional  Convention on Sept. 4, 1787, a delegate voiced an objection to the then proposed  language for Article 2, the Presidential Eligibility Requirements, and Article 2 was sent back to the committee for further consideration. On Sept. 7 the Presidential Eligibility Requirements issue of Article 2 was again brought to the floor, was brought to a vote and unanimously approved. It included the “Natural Born Citizen” requirement initially proposed by John Jay.

7.  As noted above, the vast majority of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were attorneys. They had attended the very best colleges and universities in the U.S., which had modernized their curriculum and that some of the delegate attorneys had attended British universities, which, in the time period-1770, also included the concepts of Natural Law in their Philosophy curricula.

8. Three copies of the 1775 version of the book Law of Nations, written in French by Emer de Vattel in 1758, had been sent to Ben Franklin by its publisher. Mr. Franklin had sent one copy to the Library Company of Philadelphia (LCP).  In that same year, Mr. Franklin had sent a letter to the publisher informing him that he had been often loaning his copy to other congressman and they were in admiration of Vattel. The LCP was located on the 2nd floor of the Constitutional Convention building in 1787, and arrangements had been completed to provide library membership rights in the LCP on the second floor to all the Constitutional Convention delegates. The 1775 French version of Law of Nations was in the LCP catalog (titled in French: Les Droit des gens), as well as the Law of Nations, 1760 English version. The catalog was also an  inventory of the books on the shelf in 1789 which encompass the dates of the 1787 Constitutional Convention.

President Obama9. (a) We contend that it is inconceivable that 53 of the most able and highly educated gentleman in the United States, including 33 attorneys educated at the finest universities, as a group would not understand the meaning of the term, "natural born Citizen” before they would have cast a unanimous vote to include the term “natural born Citizen” in the President’s Eligibility Requirements. Further it is our contention that the delegates understood that the term “natural born Citizen” had a connection to Natural Law at the time the convention delegates voted unanimously to include the “natural born Citizen” language in Article 2.

 

9. (b) The preamble of the Declaration of Independence issued by the majority of the Congressmen of this nation on July 4, 1776 made reference to Natural Law and was based on the Natural Law concepts as set forth by Vattel, Wolf and Pufendorf.

Thomas Jefferson, who authored the Declaration of Independence, had been previously responsible for writing the then new Constitution for the State of Virginia which was also based on the Natural Law principles of those same philosophers. In addition, shortly after the 1787 Constitutional Convention completed its work, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, then President of the College of William and Mary, in 1789 significantly changed that college’s Educational Model by eliminating the Greek and Hebrew requirements and created a new regime involving Natural Law and Political Science as the new curricula elements. James Madison had been the instructor for these courses prior to the 1789 educational regime change.

Thus, the concepts of Natural Law, set out in the Declaration of Independence, in the U.S. Constitution and in the State of Virginia Constitution, had never before in the history of the World been employed in the establishment of a representative republic.  It was the first time that a colony of a ruling power had set forth in a declaration to the sovereign that the sovereign had violated the Natural Rights of the colonists.

10. During the period that followed the Declaration of Independence in 1776 the principles of Liberty and Natural Law, as mentioned in the Preface of said Declaration, were frequently addressed by the American congressmen and that any interpretation of the term “natural born Citizen” at the time of the Signing of the Constitution in 1787 would be the position taken by Justices Fuller and Harlan in their dissent in the Wong Kim Ark  169 U.S. 715 case in which they wrote, “Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution, I submit, it is unreasonable that …Natural Born Citizen applied to (just) anybody.” These Supreme Court Justices clearly meant that the Court must refer to a meaning under Natural Law because it cannot be that just any child born in the U.S. would become a citizen by birth here because that would not address the danger they then feared of persons with an allegiance to a foreign power could become citizens.

11. (a) On Sept. 4, 1787, during the consideration by the delegates of the Presidential Eligibility Requirements in Article 2, Paragraph 5, there was a very powerful OBJECTION expressed that had to have been heard and understood by the Convention. Specifically, the OBJECTION was: “NO NUMBER OF YEARS (of residence in the U.S.) COULD POSSIBLY PREPARE A FOREIGNER FOR THAT PLACE [the presidency].” Based on the widely felt fear of the damage that a foreigner could unleash on the nation if a foreigner filled the highest position of our government, a change was requested. To address this fear, the committee submitted a change to the Eligibility Requirements for the Office of the President in Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5, specifically that the president must be a “natural born Citizen.”

11. (b)(1) We contend that from the 6th Century B.C., known as the “Classical Period,” Greek and Roman prose literature was the basis for the Educational Model in the colleges in the American colonies during the 1740s, specifically as it related to the study of politics and nations. This field encompassed the “Natural Law”102 philosophy, and Law of Nations evolved under the influence of the Enlightenment.101

11. (b)(2) By 1760 the term “Natural Law” had become widely understood by the learned and that it had permeated to all201.  So suffused203 was a concern for natural law and its intellectual origins at the time of the Revolution that, as noted above, the opening line of the Declaration of Independence makes a direct reference to the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God as the initial appeal to mankind for the justness of the American cause. Natural Law was thus the ultimate antidote to British claims of supremacy.204

 

4th_vattel11. (b)(3) By 1770 Emer de Vattel had become world renowned for his wonderful work Law of Nations and that it was the most influential treatise for the colonists.301 Specifically, he helped them in many areas including partnering302 to the exclusion of the sovereign, defensive unions with weaker states303, formation of perpetual confederation, as well as strategy for growth by association.304

 

There is absolutely no question but that Vattel was unrivaled in his influence on the American founders306, most all of whom were fluent in French and fully understood the French version of Law of Nations.

11. (b)(4) In view of the widespread publicity and familiarity with Natural Law, it is our contention and belief that the words “natural born,” which are part of the term “natural born Citizen,” were selected by the drafting committee because the words “natural born” indicate to any legally informed person that this is a special type of citizenship which is recognized in the Natural Law and in Vattel’s Law of Nations.

 

11. (b)(5) Natural Law recognizes the term jus sanguinis as a special form of citizenship in which a child’s nationality is determined by the citizenship of both of the child’s parents. This is a special form of citizenship, which is closely related to the citizenship of a child under section 212 of Vattel’s Law of Nations.

11. (b)(6) Since the term “natural born Citizen” was added to the Article 2 Presidential Eligibility Requirements of the Constitution to address the fear of those with foreign allegiances ascending to the presidency, everyone familiar with Vattel’s Law of Nations would know that Section 212 of Vattel’s Book I, Chapter 19 was involved because that section defines in French “Les naturels ou indigenes” are those persons born in a country of parents [plural] that are citizens.  The complete sentence, Les naturels ou indigenes,” sont ceux qui sont nés dans le pays, de parents citoyens in French translates to “The natural or native, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”

To further establish the relevance of Section 212, the last line of that section specifically makes it clear that this provision is directed to the special emotional relationship to the country if a child is born of parents who are citizens rather than foreigners.  The last sentence states, "…if he is born there of a foreigner it will only be his place of birth, and not his country." It is not essential to show that there was an English language translation at the date of the 1787 Convention that matches the English words, “natural born Citizen.” The committee carefully chose the English words “natural born Citizen” for the Constitution as John Jay submitted them so that the sentence would have the identical meaning as the 1758 Vattel sentence in French and to make it obvious that the term refers to the Natural Law and to Vattel’s Law of Nations.

11. (c) The fact that the eligibility requirement was passed unanimously is generally powerful evidence that that the vote was the “original intent” of the delegates, which is the usual question that needs to be answered positively when evaluating and construing the enforceability of a constitutional provision.

Conclusion:

12. (a) It is clear that the term “natural born Citizen” in Article 2, Section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution which states, “No person except a natural born Citizen ...shall be eligible for the Office of the President...”  requires a reference to the history of the United States to understand that term.

12. (b) We believe that in view of the degree of knowledge of the highly educated statesmen, congressmen and delegates to the Constitutional Convention in 1787, this sentence in Article 2 clearly makes reference to the Natural Law and to Vattel’s Law of Nations, in which the term is clearly and unequivocally defined.

12. (c) We are aware of a 1987 article directed to the issue of Eligibility Qualifications of the President.401 The analysis of this paper is based on the Farrand Records of the Constitutional Convention of 1911. Much better records are available today as can be seen in the Madison # 11(a) record and in the Bancroft record in the #11(a) citation. In fact, the Farrand record they relied on failed to show that there was an objection from the floor when the Presidential Eligibility issue was raised.  This objection obviously led to the addition of the term “natural born Citizen.”  For some reason, in complete disregard to the ordinary facts of Conventions, this article suggests there was something strange about the fact that Farrand’s Record showed no debate on this issue.  Everyone knows that there were no official records made of the Convention and that the Farrand records were inherently defective. Further in a convention in a small facility like Carpenter’s Hall where issues are discussed privately and where there is no disagreement that it is very common that there is little or no debate, normally evidenced by the unanimous approval. Even more to the point, the analysis failed to consider external facts, such as the educational background of the delegates, the historical situation of the nation as well as the political fears of the founders as noted by John Jay and approved by George Washington.  This deficiency is best addressed by the words of Mr. Bederman:

 

fathers“Comparative constitutionalism has something to offer not only for the making of Constitutions but also their interpretation. If originalism is going to be consistently and legally espoused as a means of constitutional construction, then the complete mentalite of the framing generation needs to be observed.  If it matters what the ‘intelligent and informed people’ of the Framing generation understood the Constitution to mean, it would be folly to exclude from the analysis of the crucial element of the educational background, historical sensibilities, and political fears of those people. As I have suggested here, classicism and ancient history were crucial components of those understandings and beliefs, and were as significant as the Framer’s economic interests, their religious values and their confidence in the rule of law and the promise of liberty.402”

12. (d) In our opinion, it is absolutely clear that under Vattel’s Law of Nations, Chapter XIX, Section 212, that Mr. Obama does not comply with the Article 2, Section 1 eligibility requirements of the U.S. Constitution to hold the Office of the President. This analysis is also based on Mr. Obama’s public admission that his father, a Kenyan, was still a British citizen in 1961 when Barack II was born. For most of this nation, once they understand and appreciate the historical place of the doctrine of Natural Law and the Law of Nations, this conclusion will be accepted, resulting in a sad day, maybe the most sorrowful day ever for our nation. We are good people, Democrats, Republicans, and independents. Each of us will need to come to terms with the fact that Mr. Obama has known for many years that he is not a "natural born Citizen” of the United States. None of us can hide any longer from this fact and each of us will need to consider the ramifications to our children of the immorality of his actions.

Citations:

 

#1  URL: http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Jus+naturae

#2  URL:  http://www.nlnrac.org/earlymodern/law-of-nations

#3 James Madison’s records of the Constitutional Convention Proceedings:

For Sept. 4, 1787: URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/0904.html

For Sept. 7, 1787; URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/0907.html

  George Bancroft, History of the Formation of the Constitution of the United States, Vol. 2, D. Appleton&Co.,1882, p.192-3

#4 French Educators in the Northern States during the Eighteenth Century, by  Rodrigue, E.M., The French Review, Vol.14, no.2 (Dec. 1940) p.95-108   URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/380865

      Bederman, David J., The Classical Foundations of the American Constitution, p. 21-25; p.109-110; p.162-163

URL: http://huguenot.netnation.com/general/huguenot.htm

URL: http://huguenot.askdefine.com/    The heritages of John Jay, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

#5 Biography of the Constitutional Delegates, 33 attorneys and 20 non-attorneys

URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/delegates/

#6(a) William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Papers (1892), at  Oct. 1892,  William and Mary College Quarterly

URL: http://files.usgwarchives.org/va/schools/wmmary/pres0000.txt         See Pg. 73

URL: http://www.nlnrac.org/american/colonial-roots

#6(b) Bancroft, George,  History of the Formation of the Constitution of the United States, Vol. 2, D. Appleton&Co.,1882, p.436

John Jay, handwritten letter dated July 25, 1787 to George Washington and reverse side.

URL: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/exhibitions/constitution/essay.html   (press 10627 re July 25 letter)

URL: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/exhibitions/constitution/essay.html   (press 12782 re July 25 letter reverse)

#6(c)  James Madison’s records of the Constitutional Convention Proceedings:

  For Sept. 4, 1787: URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/0904.html

  For Sept. 7, 1787; URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/0907.html

   Bancroft, George, History of the Formation of the Constitution of the United States, Vol. 2, D. Appleton&Co.,1882, p.192-3

#7  Delegate Listing including Biographical data—33 attorneys and 20 non-attorneys

URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/delegates For listing colleges of delegates see URL: : http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/delegates/education.html

#8  re book copies  URL: http://www.scribd.com/doc/63130788/Ben-Franklin-thanks-Charles-Dumas-for-Copies-of-Vattel-s-Law-of-Nations-or-Principles-of-Natural-Law

 re: Dumas/loaning

Re Library Co in Carpenter’s Hall URL:

 www.librarycompany.org/about/Instance.pdf  See Page 5.

Re 1789 LCP Catalogue           URL: http://www.archive.org/stream/catalogueofbooks01libr/catalogueofbooks01libr_djvu.txt    At this site, you will find the 1789 catalog of the LCP. It is very difficult to navigate the catalog because their cataloging system is a nightmare—it is partially based on the size of the book and the catalog doesn't indent any subjects.

Under VIII, 228 Law Quarto, no 224, it states Law of Nations or Principles of law of nature applied to affairs of nations and foreigners, English, Translated from the French of M.de Vattel, 2 vol.in one, London 1760.

and Under VI, General Politics, Quarto 177, no. 303 it states, 1775 version, "Le Droit des gens par M.de Vattel. Gift of Mr. Dumas.

# 9(a) No citations

#9(b) Re: connect of nat. Law and Declaration   URL:  http://www.nlnrac.org/american/declaration-of-independence

 Re T. Jefferson   Thomas Jefferson, “Writings”, (Merril Patterson . ed.; Library of Am. Ed., 1984

Re W&M   William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Papers (1892), at Oct 1892 William and Mary College Quarterly

URL:  http://files.usgwarchives.org/va/schools/wmmary/pres0000.txt  See P. 73

Re T. Jefferson and Nat Law:. Bederman, David J., The Classical Foundations of the American Constitution, p, 46-47

#10 Wong Kim Ark  169 U.S. 715

#11(a) James Madison’s records of the Constitutional Convention Proceedings:

For Sept. 4, 1787: URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/0904.html

For Sept. 7, 1787; URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/0907.html

   Bancroft, George, History of the Formation of the Constitution of the United States, Vol. 2, D. Appleton&Co., 1882, p.192-3

11(b)(1) Bederman, David J, “The Classical Foundations of the American Constitution”

(101)  Pg. ix

(102)..Pg. 21; Pg. 26

11(b)(2)

(201)  Bederman    Pg. 21

(203)  Bederman    Pg. 46

(204)  Bederman    Pg.  46

#11(b)(3)

(301)   Bederman    Pg. 109

(302)   Bederman    Pg. 110

(303)   Bederman    Pg. 110

(304)  Bederman    Pg. 110

(305)  Bederman    Pg. 110

(306)  Bederman    Pg. 273---Footnotes 99—104 Vattel

#11(b)(4) none

#11(b)(5) URL: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/jus+sanguinis

#11(b)(6) none

#11(c) URL: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/v103/n2/703/lr103n2kay.pdf

#11(d) no citations#

#12(a) none

#12(b) none

#12(c)   (401) Nelson, M, “Constitutional Qualification for President”, Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 17, No.2, (Spring 1987), pp. 383-399

(402) Bederman   Pg. 231

#12(d) none

 

Amil Imani is the author of Obama Meets Ahmadinejad and Operation Persian Gulf.

 

2012-04-29 01:12:54
31550
Print
 
Comments List
Lori,

You are right, somehow the court and Congress believe Article II natural born Citizen isn't defined, or is just too vague for anybody to understand what its meaning is. They have forgotten Judge Duane's instructions to start with de Vattel. This is the real counter-revolution that has been slowly proceeding using English common law without de Vattel as its base.

Efforts to Eliminate the Natural Born Requirement (2003-2005)

Proving that the players involved knew the correct definition of natural born citizen borrowed from the Law of Nations by our founders - 1) those born citizens under the cloak of allegiance of their father's; 2) those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights; 3) The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; 4) in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen. – that they knew Barack Hussein Obama II did not meet that definition as a foreign or dual citizen via his father’s British citizenship and that they worked feverishly to find a way around this constitutional requirement for office, as Obama was about to become president…

The effort to remove the natural-born citizen requirement from the U.S. Constitution actually began in 1975 – when Democrat House Rep. Jonathon B. Bingham, [NY-22] introduced a constitutional amendment under H.J.R. 33 which called for the outright removal of the natural-born requirement for president found in Article II of the U.S. Constitution – “Provides that a citizen of the United States otherwise eligible to hold the Office of President shall not be ineligible because such citizen is not a natural born citizen.”

Bingham’s first attempt failed and he resurrected H.J.R. 33 in 1977 under H.J.R. 38, again failing to gain support from members of congress. Bingham was a Yale Law grad and member of the secret society Skull and Bones, later a lecturer at Columbia Law and thick as thieves with the United Nations via his membership in the Council on Foreign Relations.

Bingham’s work lay dormant for twenty-six years when it was resurrected again in 2003 as Democrat members of Congress made no less than eight (8) attempts in twenty-two (22) months, to either eliminate the natural-born requirement, or redefine natural-born to accommodate Barack Hussein Obama II in advance of his rise to power. The evidence is right in the congressional record…

1. On June 11, 2003 Democrat House member Vic Snyder [AR-2] introduced H.J.R 59 in the 108th Congress - “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsors: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14]; Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10]; Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4]; Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49]; Rep LaHood, Ray [IL-18]; Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4].

2. On September 3, 2003, Rep. John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 67 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]

3. On February 25, 2004, Republican Senator Don Nickles [OK] attempted to counter the growing Democrat onslaught aimed at removing the natural-born citizen requirement for president in S.2128 - “Natural Born Citizen Act - Defines the constitutional term "natural born citizen," to establish eligibility for the Office of President” – also getting the definition of natural born citizen wrong. – Co-sponsors Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK]; Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA]

4. On September 15, 2004 – as Barack Obama was about to be introduced as the new messiah of the Democrat Party at the DNC convention, Rep Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] introduced H.J.R. 104 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.” – No co-sponsors.

5. Again on January 4, 2005, Rep John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 2 to the 109th Congress – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the Office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]

6. Rep Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] tries again on February 1, 2005 in H.J.R. 15 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.” – No Co-Sponsor

7. On April 14, 2005, Rep Vic Snyder [AR-2] tries yet again with H.J.R. 42 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4]

8. All of these efforts failing in committee and the 2008 presidential election looming with an unconstitutional candidate leading the DNC ticket, Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO] tries to attach the alteration to a military bill in S.2678 on February 28, 2008 – “Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act - Declares that the term "natural born Citizen" in article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution, dealing with the criteria for election to President of the United States, includes any person born to any U.S. citizen while serving in the active or reserve components of the U.S. armed forces.” – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] – (This was the first effort to also assure that GOP Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain [AZ] would be cleared to run against the DNC primary victor.)

From June 11, 2003 to February 28, 2008, there had been eight (8) different congressional attempts to alter Article II – Section I – Clause V - natural born citizen requirements for president in the U.S. Constitution, all of them failing in committee -- All of it taking placing during Barack Obama’s rise to political power and preceding the November 2008 presidential election.

In politics, there are no coincidences… not of this magnitude.

Finally on April 10, 2008, unable to alter or remove the natural born citizen requirement to clear the way for Barack Obama, the U.S. Senate acts to shift focus before the election, introducing and passing S.R.511 – declaring Sen. John McCain a “natural born citizen” eligible to run for and hold the office of president. There was never any honest doubt about McCain, the son of a U.S. Navy Commander. The Sponsor of the resolution is Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO]

S.R.511 States that John Sidney McCain, III, is a "natural born Citizen'' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States. S.R511 passed by a 99-0 unanimous consent of the Senate, with only John McCain not voting. The basis was – “Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens;” – a condition not met by Barack Hussein Obama II. – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT]; Sen Webb, Jim [VA]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (They had made certain that John McCain would run against Barack Obama)

However, in the McCain resolution is also this language – “Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen' of the United States; - Whereas the term `natural born Citizen', as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;”

The U.S. Constitution is not a dictionary. The definition of a natural born Citizen is clearly defined by de Vattel, and the Natural Political Right of Inheritance. Yet this is the text that would later be issued in Congressional Research Service talking points memos distributed to members of congress, to protect an individual that all members of congress know and understand to be an “unconstitutional” resident of the people’s White House – Barack Hussein Obama II.


ex animo
davidfarrar
Stephen, many Americans believe that birtherism is rooted in bigotry. Your post leaves no doubt that this belief holds merit.
Excellent article!!!!!!!!
They have already set themselves up as a ruling class (Congress), being able to hold office for life, and we are required to support them for life, after one term of office, correct? Let us not forget all of the power they accumulate, and the wealth they accumulate through their offices. Congress is a ruling aristocracy, and we are their serfs.
What a wonderful article and so many great comments.

For my two cents, I would like to add that US naturalization and immigration code notes a difference between "native born"( which would cover someone born here, in my opinion) and "natural born". I think that addresses the objection of birthplace and general citizenship quite nicely.

Then there is the problem of the courts ruling on the definition of the term "natural born citizen". In my opinion, the courts should require an official definition from Congress. Oho! And there's the rub, because the Senate of the 110th Congress voted unanimously to approve non-binding SR 511 to allow Mr. McCain to be eligible to sit as POTUS. Even though the legislation is non-binding, the court may use it to establish what the Congress would do if it were asked to provide a definition. The definition in SR 511 is born of American parents(note the plural) on American soil(the military base abroad.

Not only is it allowable for the court to use this to establish/confirm a defintion for the term "natural born citizen", but it was done prior to the 2008 election and even mr. obama voted for it himself-meaning that he knew then and knows now that he is not eligible to serve as POTUS.

That's my opinion. Added to the historical facts, SB 511 is the nail in the coffin on this one - assuming that mr. obama's father really was Mr. Obama Sr., That is.
Although the Constitution does mention two subsets of citizen: natural-born and naturalized. However, if you will broaden your gaze, you will soon discover we can say that being natural-born required no legal act, but being naturalized does.

Therefore, a more correct statement is that there are only two types of citizenship: one acquired naturally and one acquired by government authority.

ex animo
davidfarrar
Great article.

However, a closer reading of de Vattel, past section 212 to 215, you will see according to de Vattel's "Natural Rright of Inheritance: a "natural" born Citizen is a person born a citizen under the cloak of allegiance of the father is all that is required. It's true the Minor court did use the example of a person born of two citizen-parents within the jurisdiction, but that is simply a common tenent of de Vattel's Natural right of Inheritance

There are only two requirments to being natually born: one, you must be a citizen at birth, and of the citizenship of the father (paternal jus sanguinis).

In 1784 Alexander Hamilton arguing for the defense in the case of Rutgers v. Waddington extensively used Vattel, quoting prolifically from the Law of Nations.

Judge James Duane in his ruling described the importance of the new republic abiding by the Law of Nations, and explained that the standard for the court would be Vattel. He ruled that the Statues passed under the color of English Common Law, must be interpreted from the standpoint of its consistency with the law of nations. This concept of Vattel lead to the creation of the Judiciary branch of our government to insure that Congress could never legislate away the provisions of the Constitution.


Let me explain: Article II, Section I, Clause 4 -- Clause 5 if you are using an old, outdated copy of the US Constitution, according to the Ankeny court -- is all about the qualification of the President and Vice-President -- the ruling class.


THE REAL CONSTITUTIONAL DILEMMA FOR "BIRTHERS"


By natural law, an Article ll 'natural born' Citizen is a person born a US citizen under the cloak of allegiance of the father. This is what de Vattel calls: the Natural Political Right Of Inheritance.


Allowing the courts to decide who is or who isn't a 'natural born' Citizen allows the government to create the 'ruling class' rather than the "consent of the governed."


One thing is known for certain: if we allow Congress to create the ruling class, they will do so to their own advantage and we will soon lose yet another one of our most cherished, self-evident, unalienable truths: that all men are created equal.

ex animo
davidfarrar


ex animo
davidfarrar
Obama is required to be born in the US, and be a Natural born citizen.
He hasn't proven birth in the US, and can't be a Natural born citizen according to the USSC decision in Minor v. Happersett!

Obama didn't release an authentic Hawaii DOH issued document!

No Obama long form birth certificate released contains a raised visible embossed seal of authentication.

Ann Dunham's signature on Obama's fraudulent long form birth certificate is in two separate layers, even though it was allegedly created as a part of a single scan that would only create a single layer document.

There is no a logical reason for Obama's long form birth certificate to have a mistake in the Registrar's stamp, and no other birth certificate stamped by Alvin T Onaka containing that error is known to exist.

Fukino described Obama's long form birth certificate as being half handwritten and half typewritten, and the document that Obama released does not match that description.

A document created as a scan alone contains only one layer, while Obama's released long form birth certificate has numerous layers, meaning that changes or enhancements were made to the document that could not be present on the original long form birth certificate retained by Hawaii DOH, from which the released copy was allegedly made.

An investigation by Sheriff Arpaio has found probable cause to believe that the document Obama has released is a fraudulent document.

Many document experts have determined that Obama's long form birth certificate is in fact a fraudulent document, and Hawaii DOH employees are not document experts, they are only employees.

How can Hawaii DOH verify a document that does not contain a raised visible embossed seal of authentication making it an official State of Hawaii issued document?

What is unreasonable about asking for absolute actual proof of identity from a suspected fraud who claims birth in the US, while also being the very first known person to say that he was born in Kenya?
Both statements Obama has made cannot possibly be true.
If the founders indeed wanted the President of the United States of America to be limited to the offspring of American citizens, why didn't they state this in no uncertain terms?

The Constitution mentions two subsets of citizen: natural-born and naturalized, and any court in America will see it this way.

President Obama was born in Hawaii. He is a natural-born American citizen.
Gary, you are simply a lair..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEPM-UAXSGA

He also said this in his biography