Via Liberty Born: NEW EVIDENCE: Intent of 1790 Naturalization Act and Why It Was Totally Repealed as in Error

Click on image for more details constitutional term "natural born Citizen"
Click on image for more details constitutional term “natural born Citizen”

Via Liberty Born:  NEW EVIDENCE: Intent of 1790 Naturalization Act and Why It Was Totally Repealed as in Error:

A Defective and In Error and Totally Repealed Law Should Not and Can Not be Used to Legally Justify the Constitutional Eligibility of Anyone to be President and/or Vice-President of the United States.

Read this excellent essay and lesson from history and how the political hack attorneys of both political parties and the Congressional Research Service are deceiving Congress and the world by using a REPEALED and defective Naturalization Law to try and make a false point about who really is a “natural born Citizen” of the United States. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Barack Obama are NATURALIZED “Citizens” by statutory/positive law and are NOT “natural born Citizens” per Natural Law. They are not constitutionally eligible to serve as either President or Vice-President.  Read how the person considered to be the author of the U.S. Constitution James Madison communicated via letter to Thomas Jefferson about the defects in that 1790 first law/act of the first Congress and the need to totally REPEAL it via the 3rd Congress in 1795.  George Washington was the President in both cases and signed the 1795 Naturalization Act total REPEALING the 1790 Act, and thus any legal force it had is “annulled”, i.e., like the 1790 Act never existed, and thus it cannot ever be used for any legal purpose.  And as to inferring any intent of the founders and framers as to their understanding of the meaning of “natural born Citizen” in Article II of our U.S. Constitution as to who can be President and Commander in Chief of our military forces, the two Naturalization Acts (and the discussion by the of why they REPEALED the defective 1790 Naturalization Act) must be considered in concert:


ted-cruz-fails-three-legged-nbc-stool-test (missing 2 legs & falling over)
Ted Cruz Cannot Stand for President or Vice-President. He is Missing Two Legs!

Read this essay by CDR Kerchner (Ret) about Ted Cruz’s deliberate deception and why Ted is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States to constitutional standards.  Ted Cruz is missing two legs: … AND …

Read this essay by Article II constitutional expert Atty Mario Apuzzo on the difference between being born a basic “Citizen” of the United States and being born a “natural born Citizen” of the United States:

Here is the link to the full text of the 1790 Naturalization Act and full text of the 1795 Naturalization Act which totally REPEALED and REPLACED the faulty 1790 Naturalization Act.  See:

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the constitutional term in the presidential eligibility clause “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”: … AND … Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: and Part II:

2 thoughts on “Via Liberty Born: NEW EVIDENCE: Intent of 1790 Naturalization Act and Why It Was Totally Repealed as in Error”

  1. The 1790 Naturalization Act “swallows it’s own tail”, Cruz’s eligibility for the presidency and the Naturalization Act of 1790 | ERIC POSNER — But I disagree that “natural born Citizen” needs to be redefined. The originalist meaning and understanding as so clearly layed out in Vattel’s Principles of Natural Law, and the half dozen or more Supreme Court cases which recited it or paraphrased it, simply has to be recognized.

Comments are closed.