First, the Billboard Campaign: “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” ..… And Now, the “Undead Revolution”

News summary...

Lesson #4 - "THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE PRESIDENCY"

As we see in the excerpt below, aside from birth in the country, "natural born" requires the parents to be citizens. Meanwhile, most of the "buzz" has been focused solely on the Birth Certificate issue, which is only one part of the story, and probably the less-important part.....

"The Qualifications of the Presidency"
The constitution requires citizenship by birth within the country, i.e. birth within the country, of parents who are not extra-territorial persons. Whether a natural born citizen who should become, by naturalization, a citizen of a foreign state, and who should subsequently regain citizenship of the United States, would then be eligible to the Presidency, is at least a question. A technical argument might be constructed to support the proposition that he would; but I think the broader principles of public law and political science would incline to the negative. The President is the representative of the interests of the country against foreign countries. His entire interests should be with his own country. Citizenship in a foreign state would be very likely to create ties which might divide his interests and his sympathies.

2 Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law, John W. Burgess, page 242, 1893.

Lesson #3 - What did JOHN JAY have to say?

John Jay (1745-1829) was an American politician, statesman, revolutionary, diplomat, one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, President of the Continental Congress from 1778 to 1779 and the first Chief Justice of the United States (1789-1795). As the Governor of New York from 1795 to 1801 he became one of the leading opponents of slavery, and attempted twice to pass emancipation legislation and failed, but on the third time, he succeeded.

John Jay to His Excellency General Washington, New York, 25 July 1787:
Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government, and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural-born citizen.

History of the Formation of the Constitution of the United States of America (2d ed.), page 436, 1882.

Lesson #2 - "THE APPARATUS OF THE PRESIDENCY"

What does this legal scholar have to say about this term?

But who are "natural-born citizens"? By the so-called jus soli, which comes from the common law, the term is confined to persons born on the soil of a country; and this rule is recognized by the opening clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which declares to be citizens of the United States "all persons born or naturalized within the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." On the other hand, by the so-called jus sanguinis, which underlay early Germanic law and today prevails on the continent of Europe, nationality is based on parentage, a principle recognized by the first Congress under the Constitution in the following words: The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural-born citizens of the United States; provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.

The President - Office and Powers 1787-1957 - History and Analysis of Practice and Opinion (4th rev. ed.), Edwin S. Corwin, page 32, 1957.

Lesson #1 - Emerich de Vattel and THE LAW OF NATIONS (1758)

Let's begin with one of the texts that was most widely referenced by the Founding Fathers. Emerich de Vattel was a Swiss legal philosopher and his text was translated from the French. This translation conflates the terms "native" and "natural born."

Chapter XIX. One’s Country, and Various Matters Relating to It

The members of a civil society are its citizens. Bound to that society by certain duties and subject to its authority, they share equally in the advantages it offers. Its natives are those who are born in the country of parents who are citizens. As the society can not maintain and perpetuate itself except by the children of its citizens, these children naturally take on the status of their fathers and enter upon all the latter’s rights. The society is presumed to desire this as the necessary means of its self-preservation, and it is justly to be inferred that each citizen, upon entering into the society, reserves to his children the right to be members of it. The country of a father is therefore that of his children, and they become true citizens by their mere tacit consent. We shall see presently whether, when arrived at the age of reason, they may renounce their right and the duty they owe to the society in which they are born. I repeat that in order to belong to a country one must be born there of a father who is a citizen; for if one is born of foreign parents, that land will only be the place of one’s birth, and not one’s country.

3 The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law, E. de Vattel, (Charles G. Fenwick trans.) page 87, 1916

Welcome to Civics Class!

Have you heard the ruckus about the Birth Certificate?

There are some fanatics saying that the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is not eligible to serve in the Office of the Presidency.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution says that a candidate for President must be a Natural Born Citizen. But...... there's one problem. This term is not defined in the Constitution, and the U.S. Supreme Court has never released an opinion on the term's meaning..... although the court HAS written opinions telling what the term is not.

The growing ruckus has mostly revolved around the complaint that the candidate never released an original, long-form "Birth Certificate" revealing more of the vital details than the skimpy item that is now posted online.

How do we sort out this problem..... especially if the court is not willing to help? (numerous lawsuits have been filed and most of them have been dismissed--but not all)

One way is to begin at the grassroots level by going back to school -- and take a civics lesson. We sure could use one!

Maybe we don't even need a Birth Certificate to resolve this problem!

We can take a look at what the Founding Fathers had to say, as well as what legal scholars have written over the years.

Excerpts and quotes from 'Legal Classics' posted here will provide material for thought and discussion. Maybe we can figure this out... without the help of any high court.

Come along and join the fun.....