Arizona Willie
Gold Member
- Aug 27, 2015
- 1,064
- 220
- 210
========please point me to a precedent for a vice or presidential candidate, since those are the only two jobs to require such a thing (a definition or proclamation of natural born). nice try though.
The 1790 Naturalization Act: "children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens."
The 1790 Naturalization Act was repealed over 200 years ago. It it cites parents. Not 'parent'.
Citing the 1790 Naturalization Act as defining natural born citizenship fails twice. First, because it came after the Constitution. Establishing undeniably that natural born citizenship for children born abroad to US citizens is not embodied in the constitution. And it was repealed in 1795. Eliminating congressional statute as an avenue for the acquisition of natural born citizenship.
Use an originalitst interpretation, and the 1790 Act is irrelevant. Use Congressional Statute, and the 1790 act is irrelevant. Use a living constitution interpretation, and the 1790 Act is irrelevant.
The only thing that the 1790 Naturalization Act does is establish that in the first congress the founders clearly recognized that congress can extend natural born citizenship through statute.
That's it.
Do you realize that in your last paragraph you said the naturalization act establishes that congress can extend the natural born citizenship through statute ... while in the rest of your post you DENIED that Congress could do that. You said every one of the acts changing the specification were irrelevant.
