This video by Publius Huldah explains "natural born Citizen" in Article II, Sec. 1, clause 5, US Constitution: How our first Presidents were "naturalized citizens" and had to be exempted from the "natural born citizen" (NBC) requirement; shows the common understanding of Natural Born Citizen at the time our Constitution was drafted and ratified; explains 14th Amendment citizenship; and shows why Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz are not Natural Born Citizens.
Related articles
Explained: Natural Born Citizen & Naturalized Citizen, Tim Brown, Freedom Outpost, March 1, 2016:
To understand what the term natural born citizen means, one must understand that before July 4, 1776, everyone born in the new world was born a subject of the King of England, not a citizen. In fact, our first presidents were all born as subjects of the King of England:
George Washington
John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
John Quincy Adams
Andrew Jackson
William Henry Harrison
Each of these men, along with their fellow countrymen were transformed into citizens on July 4, 1776 by means of the Declaration of Independence.
So, what does that mean for those presidents according to the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a natural born citizen? It means that they were naturalized via the Declaration of Independence, which would later be written out in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution.
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.
Our first presidents were simply eligible because they were citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. The point is that the framers knew what a natural born citizen was and they knew they were not natural born citizens. Therefore, they had to grandfather themselves into the requirement. However, after that first generation, all subsequent presidents were required to be natural born citizens.
Instead of allowing people to define natural born citizen however they like, just as they have with Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Soebarkah, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio, the framers knew what the definition was because Vattel had defined the term in his book Law of Nations. From letter and other documents, we know that Vattel’s work was studied in the universities and the framers had it in their possession when they wrote the Constitution. So, there is no doubt as to the meaning of the term natural born citizen. So, how did Vattel define natural born citizen?
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. (Emphasis mine)
What Our Framers Knew: The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”. Publius Huldah, September 29, 2014.
A version of this article appeared as: What Our Framers Knew: The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”, The Washington Standard, July 9, 2015.
The Difference Between a U.S. Citizen and a Natural Born Citizen, Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D., D.C. Clothesline, January 10, 2015:
Many members of the political-media establishment are either deliberately misrepresenting facts for political reasons or they are simply ignorant of those facts, that is, the manner in which one becomes a citizen as opposed to the concept of natural born citizenship.
Those who equate “citizen” with “natural born citizen” often misinterpret Constitutional law and statute law, the latter meaning that Congress may pass laws only defining the manner in which one becomes a citizen, either citizen by birth or a naturalized citizen, not the Constitutional concept of natural born citizenship.
In addition, many people mistakenly cite English Common Law as the origin of the natural born citizen concept, which, in that regard, the Founders rejected; rather than its true origin, the codification of natural law described by Emerich de Vattel in his 1758 book “The Law of Nations.”...
As understood by the Founders and as applied to the U.S. Constitution, the term “natural born citizen” derived its meaning less from English Common Law, than from Vattel’s “The Law of Nations.”
They knew from reading Vattel that a “natural born citizen” had a different standard from just “citizen,” for he or she was a child born in the country to two citizen parents (Vattel, Section 212 in original French and English translation).
That is the definition of a “natural born citizen,” as recognized by numerous U.S. Supreme Court and lower court decisions...
Ted Cruz is NOT ELIGIBLE to be POTUS, nor is Rubio: Confirmed, Intellihub, February 25, 2016:
As per the definition used by the original framers of the U.S. Constitution, ratified on July 4, 1776, Republican Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz can in no way be eligible to hold the seat of President of the United States and should be considered nothing less than an illegal foreign entity attempting to breach and or ‘salt’ the White House via Canada and or Cuba.
In fact, not only was Rafael Edward Cruz, A.K.A. Ted Cruz, himself born outside of the U.S., but so was his father Rafael Bienvenido, making his campaign one-hundred percent null and void...
Indeed one could argue that Cruz doesn’t have to be born inside the U.S. to be president which is technically true, but this instance is only valid if Cruz’s father were to be a “natural born citizen” as laid out by the renown Emer de Vattel in his 1758 book Law of Nations. But that’s just it — Ted Cruz’s father was not a “natural born citizen,” fully disqualifying Cruz to be the next POTUS altogether. Make no mistake, Cruz is not an eligible candidate.
However, despite the evidence, Cruz tried desperately to circumvent this issue, in an attempt to hide it from the public by filing for a “renunciation” of his Canadian citizenship on May 14, 2014...
Taking a look at the Constitution, ratified June 21, 1788, one can clearly see our forefathers intentions.
Article 2, Sec. 1, Clause 5 reads:
So the bottom line is Cruz, like Obama, was never eligible...
Moreover Marco Rubio is not a “natural born citizen” as he was born to Cuban Nationals making Rubio a “resident alien.”
Law Center Issues Threat to Ted Cruz: Quit by the 17th & Admit You’re a Fraud – Or We will Expose You as One, April 10, 2016.
Constitutional Eligibility is a Matter of National Security – The Family Time Line of Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz, D.C. Clothesline / Freedom Outpost, April 21, 2016.
References
The Law of Nations, Or, Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns, with Three Early Essays on the Origin and Nature of Natural Law and on Luxury (LF ed.), Emer de Vattel, 1797 [see Sections 212-217]
Dissertation on the Manner of Acquiring the Character and Privileges of Citizen of the United States, David Ramsay, 1789