Jonathan Turley et al schooled on Kamala Harris NBC status by Citizen Wells commenter, Turley commenter and of course Wells, Harris not Natural Born Citizen
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising under the constitution should be decided without examining the instrument under which it arises? This is too extravagant to be maintained.”
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”…Marbury V Madison
“Every American President before Obama had two parents who were American citizens.”...Jonathan Turley commenter George
“The Natural Born Citizen requirement for the US Presidency should have been ruled on and clarified in 2008 by the SCOTUS. Marbury v Madison makes that clear. To not do so now would be treasonous.”…Citizen Wells
A decision was made at Citizen Wells in 2008 to go for quality over quantity in commenters. It has paid off.
The spam filters stay busy.
Longtime quality commenter Pete is a fine example.
He schools Jonathan Turley, et al on the qualifications to be POTUS as a Natural Born Citizen.
From Pete today.
“The issue for people like Turley, is that they are hung up on British Common Law and it’s consequences to the United States Criminal Justice system. Since most Americans are ignorant of their history and heritage, this is what you get.
Specifically, the US Supreme court needs to interpret the term “Natural Born Citizen”. The framers intent, that one could never be “King of England” and President of the United States, put the term into the requirements for POTUS, and the 12th Amendment added the requirement for VPOTUS. The did this to prevent ‘entanglements’. Please see letters from John Jay to George Washington, to understand that the Commander in Chief of the Military couldn’t have dual loyalties.
The poorly educated, or those that simply want a work around to the Constitution use English Common law reference for British Subjects to subvert the Constitution and the Republic. Yet these opinions have no explanation for why the War of 1812 was fought (over press ganging of US sailors who were born as British Subjects), and understanding that We the People ABSOLUTELY did not accept British Common law as it pertains to our citizens. However, the Founding Father’s clearly understood that they were born British Subjects, so that had to put an exemption into the Constitution, so that those born before 1790 didn’t have to be “Natural Born”.
So…..Where did the term Natural Born Citizen come from? Clearly it wasn’t British because 1) We didn’t accept British Common law on our citiizens. 2) British are born as Subjects, NOT CITIZENS, in that time and place. Therefore, we must look elsewhere to find what the founding fathers were reading to understand their intent. Herein lies the history of who were were allied with in 1790, and it wasn’t the British. Yes, we were most definitively allied with the French. Indeed, the answer lies here.
The answer is France, and a unique piece of critical thinking at the time. Vattel’s work on laws of nations.
However, claiming that it was Vattel that they turned to, without evidence, is making a story whole cloth. On the other hand, if there were proof that those individuals who conspired to create the Republic were aware of Vattel, read Vattel, then it becomes obvious that the Term “Natural Born Citizen” is derived from that work.
“The missing book came to light when the New York Society Library was restoring its 1789-1792 charging ledger, which features the borrowing history of Washington, John Adams, John Jay, Aaron Burr, Alexander Hamilton, George Clinton, and others.”
Lawyers lie, and History leaves NO DOUBT that they were reading and exchanging about Vattel’s Law of Nations. Natural Born Citizen, under Vattel, is and individual without divided loyalties at birth. That person, born of two citizen parents, on citizen soil, could claim no other country and could not be claimed by another. There was no conflict.
This story can only be understood under the geopolitical events of the time of the writing of the Constitution. We know the geopolitical events, we have the evidence of whose ideas they talked about and read, and we know why. Today’s Democrats and those Ignorant of the Constitution would destroy it and distort our history to bring their ‘new’ government. That political history is not in doubt now that we know the last POTUS used government itself to subvert the Republic as he spied on his political opponents.
In the words of our founding fathers “I hold these truths to be self evident”. The SCOTUS needs to make a decision, to take up the burden and decide upon the fate of the Republic by ‘determining’ what the term Natural Born Citizen meant.”
From astute commenter George at Jonathan Turley’s website commenting on
“Kamala Harris will NEVER be eligible to be U.S. president or vice president.
Kamala Harris’ parents were foreign citizens at the time of her birth.
– A mere “citizen” could only have been President at the time of the adoption of the Constitution – not after.
– The U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, requires the President to be a “natural born citizen,” which, by definition in the Law of Nations, requires “parents who are citizens” at the time of birth of the candidate and that he be “…born of a father who is a citizen;…”
– Ben Franklin thanked Charles Dumas for copies of the Law of Nations which “…has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting,…”
– “The importance of The Law of Nations, therefore, resides both in its systematic derivation of international law from natural law and in its compelling synthesis of the modern discourse of natural jurisprudence with the even newer language of political economy. The features help to explain the continuing appeal of this text well into the nineteenth century among politicians, international lawyers and political theorists of every complexion,” Law of Nations Editors Bela Kapossy and Richard Whatmore.
– The Jay/Washington letter of July, 1787, raised the presidential requirement from citizen to “natural born citizen” to place a “strong check” against foreign allegiances by the commander-in-chief.
– Every American President before Obama had two parents who were American citizens.
– The Constitution is not a dictionary and does not define words or phrases like “natural born citizen” as a dictionary, while the Law of Nations, 1758, did.”
“The “case law” is the pudding – it is in the Jay/Washington letter which imposed a “STRONG CHECK” against candidates for president and command in chief as citizenship status – the strongest check, “natural born citizen,” being far stronger than “citizen,” the only formal and complete definition existing in the Law of Nations, 1758, which “…has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting,….” according to Ben Franklin.
“Natural Born Citizen”- Strong Check
“Citizen” – Weak Check
To George Washington from John Jay, 25 July 1787
From John Jay
New York 25 July 1787
I was this morning honored with your Excellency’s Favor of the 22d
Inst: & immediately delivered the Letter it enclosed to Commodore
Jones, who being detained by Business, did not go in the french Packet,
which sailed Yesterday.
Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to
provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the
administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief
of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolved on, any but a natural born Citizen.
Mrs Jay is obliged by your attention, and assures You of her perfect
Esteem & Regard—with similar Sentiments the most cordial and sincere
I remain Dear Sir Your faithful Friend & Servt
After multiple attempts to get a comment posted and approved, I replied to several existing comments.
One of numerous articles I have posted that explains the ruse: