The Constitution, the Rule of Law, and the “Natural Born Citizen” Clause: A Response to Artsy Fartsy Squeeky Fromm Girl Reporter | by Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

Click on image for more info on Atty Apuzzo's legal filings and writings on the true meaning of the legal term of art "natural born Citizen"
Click on image for more info on Atty Apuzzo’s legal filings and writings on the true meaning of the legal term of art “natural born Citizen”

The Constitution, the Rule of Law, and the “Natural Born Citizen” Clause: A Response to Artsy Fartsy Squeeky Fromm Girl Reporter | by Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

Artsy Fartsy Squeeky Fromm Girl Reporter (“Squeeky Fromm”) continues in vain to try to persuade the public that she has refuted my position that an Article II “natural born Citizen” is a child born in the country to parents who were its “citizens” at the time of the child’s birth.
I.

Squeeky Fromm has taken a stab at my Jack Maskell article, The Fallacies of Congressional Legislative Attorney Jack Maskell’s Definition of a “Natural Born Citizen,”  accessed at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-fallacies-of-congressional.html .  You can read her response here. http://birtherthinktank.wordpress.com/2013/06/08/he-says-apuzzo-i-say-a-pazzo/

She says that I have misread Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875), because the Court said that “new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.” I say, so what in light of the fact that the Court also said: “At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”  Id. at 167-68.  Hence, the Court said that at common law, if one was not born in the country to citizen parents, one was an “alien or foreigner.” This is the same exact treatment that Congress gave to children born in the United States to alien parents in its Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1802, and 1855. In these acts, Congress treated children born in the United States to alien parents as alien born and in need of naturalization.  So Squeeky Fromm has proven nothing other than to show that she does not understand what she reads.  … Continue reading Atty Apuzzo’s new essay here:  http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-constitution-rule-of-law-and.html

# # # #

A warning from the past — some conspiracies are very real and are also large and well organized and in process for a long time.   The target of the one we are currently faced with is to destroy our U.S. Constitution, our Republic, our culture, and our military.  Remember this quote from history: “We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. … The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.” Quote by: J. Edgar Hoover former FBI director. Source: Elks Magazine (August 1956).

When will we return to the rule of law and enforce our identity theft protection laws and the U.S. Constitution in regards to Obama, the Usurper and Fraud-in-Chief residing in the White House? When will Congress take action!?

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

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the veil of indifference to their necessity to continually be “on watch” and at times to stand up and protect our U.S. Constitution from usurpation by progressive/marxist/radical politicians operating in relative secrecy protected by an enabling press and major media … thinking and saying it’s the job of someone else … and living their lives in general apathy about what the national government is up to, they will allow the adoption of every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.” CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s alert and paraphrasing earlier warnings about the socialist/progressives’ long-term stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a top-down, central controlled, socialist form of government.

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

9 thoughts on “The Constitution, the Rule of Law, and the “Natural Born Citizen” Clause: A Response to Artsy Fartsy Squeeky Fromm Girl Reporter | by Mario Apuzzo, Esq.”

  1. A challenge to any and all interested in the TRUTH and Constitutional Rule of Law ……….. without “resorting” to “Foreign Law and or other authorities not cited”, construe the 1790 & 1795 Acts … “to establish an uniform Rule of naturalization …” by the 1st and 3rd Congresses and determine if the “uniform Rule” is indeed establishing “birthright Citizenship” as a doctrine that is fundamental to U.S. Citizenship and remains as the controlling Statute at Large as 1st enacted in 1790.

      1. The 1790 Act … ” …to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790) provided for the birth of children of U.S. Citizen parents to be “considered as” (U.S.) natural born Citizens, however the subsequent 1795 Act … ” …to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject” (January 29, 1795). “amended” that provision and thereafter the children born to U.S. Citizen parents that were born abroad were then “considered as ” (U.S. Citizens (only).

        When reviewing the two Acts and recognizing that the changes made were primarily ‘process’ rather than substantive changes it could be argued that the “repeal” of the 1790 Act was made in recognition that the Congress had no authority to “enlarge, abridge or otherwise modify” a provision of the Executive Articles through ‘simple legislation’ and thereby acknowledging that to do so REQUIRES a Constitutional Amendment.

        A number of Bills, Acts and proposed Amendments have been circulated throughout the Congress from time to time seeking to “enlarge, abridge or otherwise modify” the Article II “eligibility” provision, but NONE have made to the floor of either Houses of the Congress for a vote.

    1. Whether Obama supporters like it or not, the “Natural-Born Citizen requirement in Article 2,Sec.1 of the U.S. Constitution. has NOT been met by Barack Obama, Jr. Barack Obama has usurped the Presidency of the United States of America, during a “Time of War”. This is an incontrovertible reality. [snip] Obama also currently stands accused of Treason, Support of Terrorism, Fraud, and RICO Crimes. The International Criminal Court has claims against Obama for Crimes against Humanity in Kenya. Obama is also a Person of Interest in the Murder of Three Men at the Trinity Church while he was a member of that church and Obama continues to actively work for the downfall of the Republic. Obama is a Criminal. He need not be Impeached (See a very cogent treatise on this subject by Dr. Vieira). Obama can be arrested and tried in U.S. District Court in D.C. Impeachment is not the proper course of action to remove a fraud from an Office that he never occupied in the first place. See: “There is NO ‘President’ Obama” or “El Usurpator”.

  2. On edit….. I apologize but I wrote those sentences in a confusing manner which distorts what I wished to convey…….. it should read as;

    ” …(March 26, 1790) provided for the children that may be born while abroad of U.S. Citizen parents to be “considered as” (U.S.) natural born Citizens, …”

    And….

    ” … subsequent 1795 Act … ” …to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject” (January 29, 1795). “amended” that provision and thereafter the children born while abroad to U.S. Citizen parents were then “considered as ” (U.S.). Citizens (only).;……….

    (My thoughts go one way and my fingers on the keyboard go another sometimes.)

Comments are closed.