CDR Kerchner (Ret)'s Blog

March 13, 2015

A Response to Neil Katyal and Paul Clement on the Meaning of a Natural Born Citizen 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”

A Response to Neil Katyal and Paul Clement on the Meaning of a Natural Born Citizen

by Mario Apuzzo, Esq. – 13 Mar 2015

I read the March 11, 2015 article entitled, “On the Meaning of a ‘Natural Born Citizen,” written by Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, found at 128 Harv.L.Rev.F 161, and accessed at http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/ .  The first sentence of the article says:  “We have both had the privilege of heading the Office of the Solicitor General.”  The article repeats the existing talking points offered in support of the constitutional eligibility of Senator Ted Cruz (all born citizens are natural born citizens) and offers nothing new.  Mr. Cruz was born in Canada to a U.S. citizen mother and a non-U.S. citizen (Cuban) father.  I have written a recent article in which I conclude the Mr. Cruz is not a natural born citizen and therefore not eligible to be President because he does not satisfy the one and only common law definition of a natural born citizen confirmed by the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875), which is a child born in a country to parents who were its citizens at the time of the child’s birth.  The article is entitled, “What Do President Obama and Senator Cruz Have In Common? They Are Both Not Natural Born Citizens,” accessed at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2015/02/what-do-president-obama-and-senator.html .  Katyal and Clement maintain that any child who becomes a citizen at birth, regardless of where born or by what means, is a natural born citizen.  They add that since Mr. Cruz became a citizen from the moment of birth and did not need any naturalization after birth he is a natural born citizen.  But there is no historical and legal evidence which demonstrates that this is how the Framers defined a natural born citizen and the authors surely have not presented that evidence even if it did exist.

The authors’ argument suffers from the fallacy of bald assertion.  They provide no convincing evidence for their position on who is included as an Article II natural born citizen.  They do not examine what was the source of the Framers’ definition of an Article II natural born citizen, let alone what was the definition of a natural born citizen when the Framers drafted and adopted the Constitution and when it was eventually ratified.  They ignore so much of the historical and legal record in coming to their bald conclusions. For a discussion of this historical and legal evidence, see the numerous articles that I have written and posted at my blog, http://puzo1.blogspot.com .

They gloss over what the Framers’ purpose was for requiring the President and Commander in Chief of the Military to be a natural born citizen.  They do not engage in any real discussion on what the Framers were trying to achieve through the clause. They dismiss all debate on the subject of foreign influence by flatly stating without any evidence:  “The Framers did not fear such machinations from those who were U.S. citizens from birth just because of the happenstance of a foreign birthplace.”

The authors cite to the Naturalization Act of 1790 and ignore the fact that the Naturalization Act of 1795, with the lead of then-Rep. James Madison and with the approval of President George Washington, repealed it and specifically changed “shall be considered as natural born citizens” to “shall be considered as citizens of the United States.”  This is even more a blatant omission given that they argue that the English naturalization statutes referred to persons born out of the King’s dominion to British subject parents as “natural born subjects.”  They fail to address this critical change made by our early Congress, critical because Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 provides that a “Citizen” of the United States was eligible to be President only if born before the adoption of the Constitution and that thereafter only a “natural born Citizen” was so eligible.  Hence, Congress referring to one as a citizen rather than a natural born citizen, given the presidential eligibility requirements of Article II, was a serious thing.  They do not discuss what the language of the 1790 Act, “shall be considered as,” meant.  They fail to address the issue that this was naturalization language and nothing more.  They fail to discuss whether Congress even had the constitutional power to make anyone born out of the United States a natural born citizen, if that was Congress’s intent in the first place.

They assert without demonstrating that the English common law supports their position.  But they totally ignore that under the English common law, only persons born in the King’s dominion and under his jurisdiction were natural born subjects and that those born out of the dominion and therefore out of his jurisdiction became subjects only through a naturalization Act of Parliament.

They cite to Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, but they do not cite to Emer de Vattel and his The Laws of Nations (1758) (1797) or Minor, two leading sources that inform on U.S. citizenship.  Both Vattel and Minor defined a natural born citizen as a child born in a country to parents who were its citizens.  What is incredible is that they cite U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) to demonstrate that British statutes called children born out of the King’s dominion to subject parents “natural born.”  But they fail to tell the reader that Wong Kim Ark considered children born out of the United States to U.S. citizen parents to be naturalized by acts of Congress. In fact, they give virtually no discussion of the Wong Kim Ark case because they know that the case said that under the English common law, only children born in the King’s dominion and under his jurisdiction were natural born subjects and that any child born  out of that dominion needed an act of Parliament to naturalize him or her.  They also fail to discuss the U.S. Supreme Court case of Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815 (1971), in which both majority and dissent said the same as Wong Kim Ark which was that children born out of the United States to U.S. citizen parents become citizens of the United States only through the grace of Congress who made them citizens through a naturalization Act without which those children would be aliens.   It simply defies logic and good reason to conclude that a person who would not be a citizen at all without a naturalization act of Congress is a natural born citizen.

Katyal and Clement argue that John Jay had children born out of the United States while he was on diplomatic assignment and that he would not have disqualified his own children from being natural born citizens.  This is a really baseless point since Jay’s children would have been born out of the United States to parents who were serving the national defense of the United States and therefore reputed born in the United States.  Likewise, they present the John McCain situation as proof for their position.  But they fail to realize that John McCain was born in Panama to U.S. citizen parents who were serving the national defense of the United States which makes him reputed born in the United States to U.S. citizen parents and therefore a natural born citizen under the one and only common law definition of a natural born citizen as confirmed by unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in Minor.  See Vattel, Section 217 (children born out of the country to citizen parents serving in the armies of the state are reputed born in the country).  They give the examples of Senator Barry Goldwater and Governor George Romney who they say were eligible to serve as President although neither was born within a state. The argument is meritless, for they were both born to U.S. citizen parents in U.S. sovereign territory subject to no foreign power and hence were born in part of the country known as the United States, all of which made them natural born citizens under the common law definition of a natural born citizen.

The authors conclude without demonstrating:  “Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a “natural born Citizen” within the meaning of the Constitution.”  They simply make this conclusion without having shown how their position is valid given the historical and legal record.

The authors also show contempt to the constitutional requirement that the President has to be a natural born citizen and for any person who dare raise any such issue.  For example, they say: “simply because he was delivered at a hospital abroad,” rather than saying that he was born in a foreign nation; “born in a Canadian hospital,” rather than saying that he was born in Canada;  “[d]espite the happenstance of a birth across the border;”  they call arguments with which they do not agree “spurious;” and they consider objections to candidate’s eligibility as “specious objections to candidates eligibility,” as if no one ever made any valid argument.

In short, Katyal and Clement’s article lacks any critical research and reasoning and is nothing more than an attempt to convince the reader that Senator Cruz is a natural born citizen because they said so and the reader has to believe that because they were former heads of the Office of Solicitor General of the United States.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
March 13, 2015

Source link:  http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2015/03/a-response-to-neil-katyal-and-paul.html

# # # #

Update 18 Mar 2015 – Attorney Henderson joins in rebutting K&C Harvard Law Review disinformation article about “natural born Citizenship”:  http://jimsjustsayin.blogspot.com/2015/03/ina-post-on-harvard-law-review-forum.html and http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/03/law-professor-and-former-aclj-senior.html

# # # #

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

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”: 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 Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

ProtectOurLiberty WebsiteSpaceMy BlogSpaceDocs Collections Re Obama SpaceMy YouTube SpaceMost Recent Full Pg Ad SpaceAd Archives SpaceFliers/Handouts SpaceBlock Ads SpaceSheriff to Sheriffs – Sheriff Kit Project SpaceGet A Sheriff Kit SpaceInterviews-Audio/Print SpaceBooks SpaceGoat’s Ledge SpaceContact Me

June 11, 2013

Obama not Eligible Under U.S. Constitution: Attorney Mario Apuzzo Appears on The Immigration Hour Radio Show with Attys Charles Kuck and Rocky Rawcliffe

Click image to learn more about Atty Mario Apuzzo

Click image to learn more about Atty Mario Apuzzo

Constitutional and Immigration Law Attorney Mario Apuzzo Appears on The Immigration Hour Radio Show hosted by Immigration Law Attorneys Charles Kuck and Rocky Rawcliffe of GA.  Atty Kuck is also a Professor at the University of GA. The show aired on Tuesday, 11 Jun 2013 at 10 a.m. ET.

Obama not Eligible Under U.S. Constitution Presidential Eligibility Clause

Listen to it on podcast here:   http://www.americaswebradio.com/podcasts/ImmigrationHourJune11.2013.mp3

# # # #

Click on image to learn the other face of Obama the Perception Management Team does not want you to learn

Obama the Enigma: Click on image to learn the other face of Obama the Perception Management Team does not want you to learn.

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/

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

June 7, 2013

Professor Henry Graff, Distinguished College Professor at Columbia University for 46 Years, Seriously Doubts Obama Ever Went to Columbia

Professor Henry Graff Distinguished Professor at Columbia University for 46 Years

Professor Henry Graff,
Distinguished Professor at Columbia University for 46 Years, does not remember Obama ever attending Columbia. Click on image for the full story.

Professor Henry Graff, Distinguished College Professor at Columbia University for 46 Years, Seriously Doubts Obama Ever Went to Columbia University.

Professor Graff: “I’m very upset by the whole story. I am angry when I hear Obama called ‘the first President of the United States from Columbia University’. I don’t consider him a Columbia student. I have no idea what he did on the Columbia campus. No one knows him.”

My comment about the Professor’s statements and Wayne Allen Roots latest report:  When oh when is a Congressional investigation going to be convened and the call for testimony of people like Chief Investigator Michael Zullo of the AZ Cold Case Posse, Wayne Allen Root, and Professor Henry Graff of Columbia, and many others, in regards to the falsified and forged life narrative and documents of the man who now calls himself Barack Hussein Obama. Ignoring the glaring evidence of identity fraud by Obama, is an extreme national security issue and high crimes and misdemeanors are being committed by the very presence of Barack Obama being in the Oval Office as the defacto President and Commander in Chief of our armed forces.  High Treason by Obama is being permitted to continue daily with every day the U.S. Congress does not take action and convene a special select committee to investigate who really is the man in the Oval Office and what is the truth about his life and ID documents — CDR Charles Kerchner (Retired)

Source Article: Ghost of Columbia- Part II: Legendary Columbia Professor Never Heard of Obama | by Wayne Allen Root @ TheBlaze.com

An excerpt from the full article:  ” … until now, I was the only one publicly voicing my suspicions. That just changed in a big way. Meet Professor Henry Graff, perhaps the most legendary and honored professor ever at Columbia University. He was THE American History and Diplomatic History professor at Columbia for 46 years. And he is more emphatic than yours truly that there are no Obama footprints at Columbia.

I was put on Professor Graff’s trail by another Columbia classmate, skeptical about Obama’s story. He told me that Professor Graff had been the speaker for the Class of ’53 last weekend at Columbia. My friend was watching Graff answer questions from the crowd when he was asked about Obama at Columbia. Graff said, “I have my doubts he ever went here.”

I did some digging and located Graff’s home phone number. I called him yesterday. Now retired, he was delighted to hear from me. He agreed to go on the record about Obama. Unlike Obama, Professor Graff clearly remembered me. He was thrilled to hear from his former student. I was in several of Graff’s classes and he remembered me like it was yesterday. He sounded great- like he hasn’t lost any of his trademark sharpness in 30 years since we last met.

I was honored to learn that this legendary historian has been following my political career for many years. But he had no such cheery things to say about the President. Graff said, “I taught at Columbia for 46 years. I taught every significant American politician that ever studied at Columbia. I know them all. I’m proud of them all. Between American History and Diplomatic History, one way or another, they all had to come through my classes. Not Obama. I never had a student with that name in any of my classes. I never met him, never saw him, never heard of him.”

Even more importantly, Professor Graff knew the other history and political science professors. “None of the other Columbia professors knew him either” said Graff.

Graff concluded our interview by saying, “I’m very upset by the whole story. I am angry when I hear Obama called ‘the first President of the United States from Columbia University.’ I don’t consider him a Columbia student. I have no idea what he did on the Columbia campus. No one knows him.” ”

Read the full essay and report here:  http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/ghost-of-columbia-part-ii-legendary-columbia-professor-never-heard-of-obama/

# # # #

Part I from Wayne Allen Root:  http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/06/video-obama-columbia-classmates-we.html

# # # #

Obama-CPUSA-150x150

Click on the image for the evidence that Obama is the great imposter and a front man for a long-term Communist Party goal to put one of their own into high office in the USA using democracy against itself.

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, 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).

# # # #

Rush Limbaugh states today — We are in the midst of a coup! : http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/limbaugh-we-are-in-the-midst-of-a-coup/print/

# # # #

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/

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

June 2, 2013

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

May 19, 2013

Learn the historical and legal truth about the “original intent” and “purpose” of the “natural born Citizen” clause in our U.S. Constitution

Click on image for more details about Obama's constitutional ineligibility and ID fraud

Click on image for more details

Learn the historical and legal truth about the “original intent” and “purpose” of the “natural born Citizen” clause in our U.S. Constitution and Obama’s usurpation of office and how the Republican Party now wishes to continue that practice of ignoring the purpose of Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of our U.S. Constitution by pushing forward other politically attractive “non-natural born” Citizen candidates for the office of President for political expediency rather than trying to amend the Constitution first, which I doubt We the People would permit on this very important national security clause in our U.S. Constitution as to who can be the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military. Click on the following link or the image:

http://www.protectourliberty.org

# # # #

A historic case revisited: Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al which was filed due to inaction by a cowardly, indifferent, and complicit Congress on the issue of the presidential eligibility clause of our U.S. Constitution and which the Judiciary decided to totally duck on the issue — and thus we are now in the mess we are in with an anti-American, foreign British national by birth and Indonesian citizen by adoption, non-natural born Citizen of the USA at the helm of our executive branch and in command of our military … who when the “2 a.m. phone call” came, ordered our brave military to stand down rather than attempt to rescue an American ambassador under attack by heavily armed Islamic terrorists in Benghazi Libya:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16344067/Lawsuit-Summary-Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-20090615-Issue-Wash-Times-Natl-Wkly-pg-9
and
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38506403/Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-filed-with-the-U-S-Supreme-Court-for-Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress

To read more of the details of the historic Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al lawsuit brought in an attempt to support and defend the “natural born Citizen” clause of our U.S. Constitution filed in the early morning hours of 20 Jan 2009 by Atty Mario Apuzzo of NJ, which went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court challenging Obama’s eligibility based on his not being a “natural born Citizen of the United States” as is required by the U.S. Constitution Article II Section 1 Clause 5, the presidential eligibility clause, see this link:  http://www.scribd.com/doc/19914488/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-DOC-00-Table-of-Contents-2nd-Amended-Complaint

# # # #

A warning from the past — some conspiracies are very real and are also large and well organized.   The target of the one we are currently faced with is to destroy our U.S. Constitution, our Republic, 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?

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/

Next Page »

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,261 other followers

%d bloggers like this: