New
York State Clarifies the Difference Between
a
“Citizen” and a “Natural Born Citizen” since July 4, 1776
>>
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-constitution-rule-of-law-and.html?commentPage=9
<<>>
New
York State ratified the U.S. Constitution ten months after it was
adopted by the framers. A “citizen” was defined by statute and a
“natural born Citizen” was determined by birth, not by definition
by statute.
The
1788 ratification text clarifies the common meaning of “citizen”
and “natural born Citizen” in 1787, a common meaning that did not
require debate as to its “original genesis original intent”
meaning of ONLY singular U.S. citizenship ONLY by being “born”
within the United States ONLY to two U.S. citizen married parents.
In
1787 America when the U.S. Constitution was passed and eventually
ratified, and in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, the
U.S. citizenship of the husband, by marriage, determined the U.S.
citizenship of the wife, and ONLY the U.S. citizenship of BOTH
married parents determined the singular U.S. citizenship of the
child.
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
1788...
Mario, you probably are already aware of the New York "natural born Citizen" text, found on the Avalon Project site.
>> http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/ratny.asp
"Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York; July 26, 1788."
"WE the Delegates of the People of the State of New York, duly elected and Met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia in the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania (a Copy whereof precedes these presents) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, Do declare and make known."
[...]
>> "That no Persons except natural born Citizens, or such as were Citizens on or before the fourth day of July one thousand seven hundred and seventy six,
>> "or such as held Commissions under the United States during the War, and have at any time since the fourth day of July one thousand seven hundred and seventy six "become Citizens of one or other of the United States, and who shall be Freeholders[*],
[* A “freeholder” is an owner of a freehold estate. See below the contemporary use by New Jersey of “freeholder” followed by the two dictionary definitions.]
>> shall be eligible to the Places of President, Vice President, or Members of either House of the Congress of the United States."
[…]
"Done in Convention at Poughkeepsie in the County of Dutchess in the State of New York the twenty sixth day of July in the year of our Lord One thousand seven hundred and Eighty eight.
"By Order of the Convention.
"Attested- GEO: CLINTON President
"JOHN McKESSONN
"ABM B. BANCKER Secretaries-
"(1) Reprinted from Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. II (1894), pp 190-203."
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Federalism
is the division of power between the Federal tripartite government
and the several State governments. So, the New York ratification
language in 1788 clearly shows the early understanding of the
division of power between New York, an individual State government,
and the Federal government.
The
ratification language shows the difference between the “citizen”
of a State who may be a “citizen” of a State by statute and by
birth and who also IS a Federal “citizen” but is NOT
a Federal “natural born Citizen” and so is NOT
“...eligible to the Office of President,” and another “citizen”
of, for example, the same State, who IS a Federal “citizen”
and who also IS a Federal “natural born Citizen” and so IS
“...eligible to the Office of President.”
The
definition of who (not “what” but “who”) is a “citizen”
of the tripartite Federation and who is a “natural born Citizen”
of the tripartite Federation is determined by the Federal government,
not an individual State or the several states combined.
If
a person wants to be “...eligible to the Office of President” of
the tripartite Federation, the person must have ONLY singular U.S.
citizenship “by” birth within the United States to two U.S.
citizen married parents.
If
a person wants to be eligible to the office of Federal Representative
or Federal Senator, the person must be at least 25 years of age or 30
years of age, respectively, and MUST reside in the United States as a
“Citizen,” NOT reside as an alien for 7 or 9 years up to and
including the year of election to office, but the aspirant Federal
Representatives or Senators MUST all reside as a United States
“Citizen” for at least 7 years or 9 years, respectively, BEFORE
being elected, up to and including the 7th or 9th year, respectively,
when elected to office.
The
1787 and perpetual residency requirements for Representatives and
Senators reveals that they were obviously NOT U.S. citizens before
they were U.S. citizens, which means that in 1787 they had to be
naturalized for at least 7 years or 9 years, respectively, BEFORE
being elected to the House or Senate. Of course, a person born with
singular U.S. citizenship by birth within the United States to two
U.S. citizen married parents is obviously eligible “by” birth,
not “by” naturalization, and so easily meets the age 35 and 14
year residency requirements to be “...eligible to the Office of
[Federal] President.”
The
age and residency requirements for the federal representatives and
federal senators helps to clarify the age and residency requirement
for the federal president.
To
be “...eligible to the Office of President”, a person MUST reside
within the United States for at least 14 years, up to and including
the year that they attain to the age of 35 (or the last 14 years, up
to including the year that they pursue the presidency at any age),
implying ONLY singular U.S. citizenship that is ONLY possible by
birth that MUST be within the United States ONLY to two U.S. citizen
married parents, NOT birth on foreign soil to only one U.S. citizen
parent, and definitely NOT birth within the United States to zero
U.S. citizen parents.
To
say that a person born within the United States to zero U.S. citizen
parents is “...eligible to the Office of President” requires an
amendment to the constitution, and a statute by Congress can NOT
amend the original intent of Article II or the Fourteenth Amendment.
That means that if a congressional statute says that a child born to
only one U.S. citizen parent on foreign soil or born to two zero U.S.
citizen parents within the United States is a U.S. “citizen,”
that child is “by” statute” a U.S. “citizen” and so the
child is NOT “by” birth a “natural born Citizen.”
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
TheFreeDictionary.com
>> http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Freeholder
free·hold
(frē′hōld′)
n.
1.
Law
a.
A form of estate in which possession is held in fee, in tail, for
the duration of the person's life, or during the life of some other
person.
b.
The tenure by which such an estate is held.
2.
A tenure of an office or a
dignity for life.
[Middle English frehold, translation of Anglo-Norman fraunc tenement : fraunc, free + tenement, possession.]
free′hold′er
n.
Cite
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth
Edition. Copyright © 2011 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing
Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.
All rights reserved.
<<>>free•hold•er
(ˈfriˌhoʊl dər)
n.
1.
the owner of a freehold.
2.
an elected official of a county in New Jersey.
[1325–75;
Middle English freholder]
Cite
Random House Kernerman
Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright
2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
<<>>New Jersey, Camden County
>> http://www.camdencounty.com/government/about-camden-county/what-freeholder
What is a Freeholder?
How was it created?
The term "Freeholder" originated in the early 1700s. The State of New Jersey continues to use this title, which was established in Colonial Times when only men who held their land "free and clear" were eligible to be chosen for membership on the county governing body. ….
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Here is Mario's comment on April 12, 2014 at 9:08 PM about the “natural born Citizen” requirement as clarified by New York State when the Constitution was ratified.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...
Art (ajtelles),
I of II
You posted thus:
"Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York; July 26, 1788."
"WE the Delegates of the People of the State of New York, duly elected and Met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia in the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania (a Copy whereof precedes these presents) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, Do declare and make known."
[...]
"That no Persons except natural born Citizens, or such as were Citizens on or before the fourth day of July one thousand seven hundred and seventy six, or such as held Commissions under the United States during the War, and have at any time since the fourth day of July one thousand seven hundred and seventy six become Citizens of one or other of the United States, and who shall be Freeholders, shall be eligible to the Places of President, Vice President, or Members of either House of the Congress of the United States."
[...]
"Done in Convention at Poughkeepsie in the County of Dutchess in the State of New York the twenty sixth day of July in the year of our Lord One thousand seven hundred and Eighty eight.”
-----
The New York proposed constitutional amendment put forth during the New York ratifying convention demonstrates the critical constitutional distinction between a natural born citizen and a citizen.
We can see that the proponents saw only one type of natural born citizen. At the same time, they saw different types of citizens. These classes of citizens became relevant given the grandfathering that the proponents provided for specific persons who were made eligible for the listed offices, which were not only for President and Vice-President, but also for Representative and Senator. Here is the scheme:
1. The amendment grandfathered as eligible persons who were citizens as of on or before July 4, 1776. This would have included for eligibility those who were born on or before July 4, 1776 and who became citizens of one of the colonies on July 4, 1776 and retroactively to before that date. These persons would have become citizens of their respective colony under the then-prevailing English common law or some state other common law or statute. The citizen status was grandfathered and would have expired after all those who qualified at that time died off in the future.
2. The amendment grandfathered those commissioned during the Revolutionary war and who became a citizen of one of the states or of the United States after July 4, 1776. Given that such persons had to have had a commission during the revolutionary war, these persons would have included persons who were born before July 4, 1776, but who did not become a citizen of one of the states or of the United States until after July 4, 1776. So if one was not a natural born citizen, but rather became a citizen of one of the states or of the United States after July 4, 1776, that person had to also have a commission during the war in order to be eligible for the listed offices. Hence, the proponents of this amendment wanted, for those who became a state citizen or a citizen of the United States after July 4, 1776, the additional requirement that the person also have had a military commission during the revolutionary war. Being a state citizen or a citizen of the United States was not sufficient if that status was acquired
Continued . . .
April 12, 2014 at 9:08 PM
- Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...
after July 4, 1776. The only way that the proponents trusted a person who became a citizen after July 4, 1776 was if that person was also an officer in the Revolutionary War. Like those persons who became citizens on or before July 4, 1776, these persons also would have become citizens of a state (made citizens of the United States when the Constitution was ratified) under the then-prevailing English common law or other state common law or statute. Additionally, even if one qualified under the status, the status was only grandfathered and would have expired after all those who qualified at that time died off in the future.
The proponents also required that would-be office holders be freeholders (land holders). It is not clear from how the amendment was written to which class of citizens (all of them or only the last one listed before the requirement was introduced) this additional requirement attached.
What is telling from this proposed amendment is that after the grandfather period expired, being a citizen was no longer sufficient for one wanting to be President, Vice-President, Representative, or Senator. Then, only a natural born citizen was eligible for those offices. This means that one could have been a citizen of one of the colonies or states, but that status was only grandfathered. The grandfathering was tied to being born on or before July 4, 1776 and being a citizen at that specific time. If one was not a citizen by July 4, 1776, one could be eligible only if one had a commission during the revolution. So, all these persons who became citizens of their colonies or states by virtue of whatever law may had applied to their situation (the English common law or a state’s common or statutory law), were grandfathered to be eligible for office. But that citizen status was no longer sufficient for those born in the future. For those born after July 4, 1776, they had to be natural born citizens whose definition could not have been the same for one to become a citizen of a state or of the United States. Indeed, as we saw from Minor v. Happersett (1875), the common law the nomenclature with which the Framers were familiar when they drafted and adopted the Constitution provided the specific definition of a natural born citizen. And that definition was a child born in a country to parents who were its citizens at the time of the child’s birth.
This scheme demonstrates that the New York amendment proponents did not see for those born after the grandfather period expired a citizen as eligible for the offices of President, Vice-President, Representative, or Senator. So it did not matter how and under what law a citizen was defined. What only mattered post-grandfather period was that one had to be a natural born citizen. So, for those born post-grandfather period, under this New York constitutional scheme and under the Constitution as actually ratified, the English common law rule that Justice Gray in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) said survived the revolution would have made persons citizens of their respective states. That rule did not control anything when it came to eligibility for these offices, including the Office of President, for that rule would have made state citizens who became “citizens of the United States” when the Constitution was ratified. On the other hand, the common law of which Minor spoke was critical, for it was by that law which the Framers defined who were the natural born citizens and thus eligible to be President in the post-grandfather period. And under that common law, only children who were born in the country to parents who were its citizens were the natural born citizens.
April 12, 2014 at 9:11 PM
This is my comment to Mario the next day, April 13, 2014 at 12:32 AM.
Dittos, Mario...
Your
comments on April 12, 2014 at 9:08 PM are relevant for the September
17, 1787 Article II Section 1 Clause 5 language, for the July
26, 1788 New York U.S. Constitution ratification language, and for
the March 11, 1861 Confederate Constitution Article II Section
1 Clause 7 language written 73 years later, which I previously
posted here on February 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM*,
and about which the Obama birth narrative defenders, aka the
Obama-birthers, have been silent.
* See also: http://original-genesis-original-intent.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-1861-confederate-states_16.html
- - - - - - - - - -
You wrote -
>> “We can see that the proponents saw only one type of natural born citizen.
>> “At the same time, they saw different types of citizens.
>> “These classes of citizens became relevant given the grandfathering that the proponents provided for specific persons who were made eligible for the listed offices, which were not only for President and Vice-President, but also for Representative and Senator.
>> “Here is the scheme:
>> “1. The amendment grandfathered as eligible persons who were citizens as of on or before July 4, 1776.
>> “This would have included for eligibility those who were born on or before July 4, 1776 and who became citizens of one of the colonies on July 4, 1776 and retroactively to before that date.
>> “[...] The citizen status was grandfathered and would have expired after all those who qualified at that time died off in the future.
>> “2. The amendment grandfathered those commissioned during the Revolutionary war and who became a citizen of one of the states or of the United States after July 4, 1776.
>> “Given that such persons had to have had a commission during the revolutionary war, these persons would have included persons who were born before July 4, 1776, but who did not become a citizen of one of the states or of the United States until after July 4, 1776.
>> “So if one was not a natural born citizen, but rather became a citizen of one of the states or of the United States after July 4, 1776, that person had to also have a commission during the war in order to be eligible for the listed offices.
>> “Hence, the proponents of this amendment wanted, for those who became a state citizen or a citizen of the United States after July 4, 1776, the additional requirement that the person also have had a military commission during the revolutionary war.
>> “Being a state citizen or a citizen of the United States was not sufficient if that status was acquired after July 4, 1776. The only way that the proponents trusted a person who became a citizen after July 4, 1776 was if that person was also an officer in the Revolutionary War.”
- - - - - - - - - -
#1 - 1787 U.S. Constitution, Article II Section 1 Clause 5
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of the President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
#2 - "Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York; July 26, 1788."
>> http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/ratny.asp
[…]
That no Persons except natural born Citizens,
or such as were Citizens on or before the fourth day of July one thousand seven hundred and seventy six,
or such as held Commissions under the United States during the War,
and have at any time since the fourth day of July one thousand seven hundred and seventy six
become Citizens of one or other of the United States, and who shall be Freeholders,
shall be eligible to the Places of President, Vice President,
or Members of either House of the Congress of the United States.
Clause 7 in the Confederate Constitution of 1861 helps to clarify the original intent of the original birthers who wrote the Federal Constitution that was ratified 73 years earlier in 1788.
See the entire “Constitution of the Confederate States of America March 11, 1861” at The Avalon Project.
>> http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_csa.asp
(7)
No person except a
natural-born citizen of the Confederate States, or a citizen thereof
at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, or a citizen
thereof born in the United States prior to the 20th of December,
1860, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any
person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained the age
of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the
limits of the Confederate States, as they may exist at the time of
his election.
The clarity is in the historical fact that the 1787 Article II Section 1 Clause 5 three word unit “natural born Citizen” was understood by the Confederate Constitution authors 73 years later in 1861 to mean the SAME thing that it meant to the 1787 original birthers who were the original authors.
“Natural born Citizen” meant ONLY born on U.S. soil with two parents who were married to each other BEFORE the child was born, and BOTH parents were citizens of the United States of America by either birth or naturalization BEFORE the child was born on U.S. soil, birth on the U.S. soil being the common sense prerequisite to residing for 14 years on U.S. soil by age 35.
The Confederate Constitution grandfather phrase “… or a citizen thereof born in the United States prior to the 20th of December, 1860, shall be eligible …,” with the independence and naturalization cut-off date of December 20, 1860, helps informed students of the U.S. Constitution, that was ratified 73 years earlier in 1788, to understand the original intent of the original birthers who did not insert their own independence and naturalization cut-off date of July 4, 1776 into Article II Section 1 Clause 5.
The value of the July 26, 1788 New York U.S. Constitution ratification language is that it helps to clarify the original intent of the September 17, 1787 Article II Section 1 Clause 5 original authors.
The value of the March 11, 1861 Article II Section 1 Clause 7 language in the Confederate Constitution is that it ALSO helps to clarify the original intent of the original authors of “natural born Citizen” in Article II Section 1 Clause 5.
Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of America
No comments:
Post a Comment