New Essay on Natural Born Citizenship by Attorney Mario Apuzzo Addresses the Fallacies of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report by Attorney Jack Maskell

Click image to learn more about Atty Mario Apuzzo
Click image to learn more about Atty Mario Apuzzo

New Essay on Natural Born Citizenship by Attorney Mario Apuzzo Addresses the Fallacies of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report by Attorney Jack Maskell

Read it here:  The Fallacies of Congressional Legislative Attorney Jack Maskell’s Definition of a “Natural Born Citizen”

# # # #

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art "natural born Citizen"
Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art “natural born Citizen”

My remarks:  A “positive man-made law“, statutory law, “Citizen” at Birth does not make one a “natural law” “natural born Citizen” at Birth. The “at Birth” part at the end of the term tells the reader when one became a Citizen, i.e., at birth.  It does not tell one “how” they got their citizenship.  The “natural born” adjectives in the term “natural born Citizen” tell one more, not only when but how they obtained their citizenship, i.e., via “natural law”, not positive man-made laws such as Title 8 Section 1401 of U.S. Code. That law never mentions the term natural born Citizen and does not make any.  Atty Jack Maskell and others are engaging in disinformation by telling people it does. He and the others are doing this at the behest of both major political parties who wish to ignore and water down the meaning of the presidential eligibility clause in our U.S. Constitution in order to run politically attractive candidates without amending the U.S. Constitution, as provided by the Constitution.  They know that will be very difficult to do once the national security and foreign influence reasoning for the natural born Citizen clause being in there in the first place are discussed in the amendment process. So instead they are both just ignoring it and trying to change the meaning of the term, manipulating language, etc.  U.S. laws can create Citizens, at birth or later, but they cannot create natural law “natural born Citizens”.  Only the laws of nature and nature’s God and the facts at birth can do that.

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees.  Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “New Essay on Natural Born Citizenship by Attorney Mario Apuzzo Addresses the Fallacies of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report by Attorney Jack Maskell”

  1. Article II Section 1:

    “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 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.”

    If you take the diagram shown in the post above and exapand it to include everyone who has been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States
    … a subset of those are here legally…
    … a subset of those are citizens…
    … a subset of those are born citizens…
    … a subset of those are natural born citizens.

    The U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Minor vs. Happersett, directly construed the Article II Section 1 phrase “natural born citizen” as persons born in the United States to parents who were citizens.

    The U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of US v. Wong Kim Ark, directly construed the 14th Amendment and included those born on U.S. soil, to permanently-domiciled non-citizen parents, as born citizens, but it did not call them natural born citizens (in fact, it diferentiated between them and natural born citizens by saying that the first is every bit as much a CITIZEN as the second) and the Wong Kim Ark ruling did not alter the ruling in Minor.

    A natural born citizen is a person born in the country to parents (plural) who are citizens.

Comments are closed.