Main Menu

SCOTUS Agrees: Native Born Citizen May have Alien Parent

Letitia Barwell, Jane M‘Creery, and Isabella M‘Creery, daughters of a British citizen father, are native born citizens of the United States.

Supreme Court of the United States.
McCREERY’S lessee
v.
SOMERVILLE.
February 3, 1824

(22 U.S. 354)

… W. M‘Creery left at his death no children, but a brother, Ralph M‘Creery, a native of Ireland, who is still living, and who has not been naturalized, and three nieces, Letitia Barwell, Jane M‘Creery, and Isabella M‘Creery, the latter being the lessor of the plaintiff, who are the daughters of the said Ralph, and native born citizens of the United States.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/22/354/case.html

,

28 Responses to SCOTUS Agrees: Native Born Citizen May have Alien Parent

  1. avatar
    tes February 11, 2009 at 9:36 am #

    terrific find!!!! :::tipping hat:::

  2. avatar
    Anne February 11, 2009 at 10:29 am #

    native born and natural born are the same thing?? wheres your proof?? keep grasping at straws. they are NOT the same thing as the framers intent clearly illustrates. but hey, all the lawyers, democRATS and liberals think the constitution is a living document too.
    you are part of the problem.

    all you link says is that those kids were born on US soil of a foreign parent, therefore they are native born.
    They are citizens. They are not however natural born as to be natural born you need TWO US citizen(naturalized would even work) parents. period.

  3. avatar
    bogus info February 11, 2009 at 10:41 am #

    Looks to me like you are the one that is “grasping at straws.”

  4. avatar
    Heavy February 11, 2009 at 12:24 pm #

    Desparate times call for desparate measures. Problem is liberals are always desparate.

    Keep digging libs! You will eventually get to the truth and it will set us all free.

  5. avatar
    Obot 1024 February 11, 2009 at 12:40 pm #

    “They are citizens.”

    They are determined to be native citizens by the Supreme Court who is in charge of interpreting the Constitution.

    “They are not however natural born as to be natural born you need TWO US citizen(naturalized would even work) parents. period.”

    Where does it say that in the Constitution?

  6. avatar
    richCares February 11, 2009 at 12:49 pm #

    “Where does it say that in the Constitution?”

    don’t expect an answer, they don’t need an answer, god told them

  7. avatar
    bogus info February 11, 2009 at 1:00 pm #

    ROTFL.

  8. avatar
    smrstrauss February 11, 2009 at 1:57 pm #

    Actually, there are many experts who believe that Natural Born is broader than Native Born. All that are native born are Natural Born, naturally.

    And some hold that even those of us who were born abroad (at least a million of us) are also Natural Born. Someone pointed out that John Jay, who had children when he was serving as a diplomat in England, would have wanted his children to be eligible.

    But no one has ever said that to be Natural Born you have to be both born in America AND have two parents who are also citizens.

    That would mean that there are two categories of citizens born in America–native born and natural born. That would mean that the natural born have more rights and privileges than merely the native born. And yet we believe: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

  9. avatar
    Patrick McKinnion February 11, 2009 at 2:23 pm #

    The “Birthers” have been claiming a three-tier citizenship system in this country.

    1) “Natural Born” Citizen, born to two US citizen parents. Some will take it to also mean that the child has to also be born on US soil as well.

    2) “Native Born” Citizen, born to one US citizen parent or born on US soil to non-citizen parents. Some claim a child born to two US citizen parents but born outside the US is a “Native Born” rather than “Natural Born”.

    3) Naturalized Citizen.

    The problem with this argument is that it is not supported by US law OR by the US Constitution. And de Vattels “Law of Nations” is not a part of the US Constitution.

  10. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 11, 2009 at 3:24 pm #

    Unfortunately, the words “The Law of Nations” does appear in the Constitution albeit not a reference to de Vattel’s book. This is what is meant when you see “de Vattel is written into the Constitution”.

  11. avatar
    Expelliarmus February 11, 2009 at 4:29 pm #

    The only place that phrase appears is in Article I Section 8, enumerating powers of Congress:

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

    So that is giving CONGRESS the power to “define” what may be a criminal offense — it does not incorporate any putative “Law of Nations” into Constitution.

    And in any case, Vattel’s work is a philosophical work, not a legal treatise or codification. If I wrote a book called “On American Law” it could end up being a best seller, but that wouldn’t turn it into binding legal precedent, or even something that could properly be cited or argued in a court of law.

  12. avatar
    John Dean February 13, 2009 at 1:51 am #

    Grasping at straws? lol

    There is no whitey tape, there is no Michelle tape, there is no Iman, there is no fake COLB, Ed Hale is a Bigfoot murderer, Citizen Cane ran a Bigfoot site, Berg is a has-been lawyer and broke, which is the real reason he keeps asking for donations, Polarik is a nutcase, TexasDarlin is not a Democrat, and Dentist Orly is a joke…

    and you come here and accuse the owner of grasping at straws?

    🙂

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 22, 2009 at 11:30 pm #

    If you are referring to Emmerich de Vattel as the basis for your beliefs on natural born citizenship, I would point out that he used “natives” and “natural born citizens” interchangeably. See Book 1, section 212 of The Law of Nations. A more careful reading (including section 215) shows that it is one parent (the father) and not two, and not “in the country” and not even citizen so long as the father was a permanent resident.

  14. avatar
    Arliss August 3, 2009 at 10:59 am #

    Anne, you have lost your mind.

    To be a Natural Born Citizen ONLY ONE of your parents has to be a Citizen, get that thru your thick, impenetrable skull!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_Clause

  15. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 3, 2009 at 11:30 am #

    Any fool can change the Wikipedia. When it relates to Obama eligibility, partisans are very active adjusting the Wikipedia to their views.

    No citizen parents are required of one born in the United States.

  16. avatar
    Robert Laity June 6, 2010 at 12:43 am #

    TWO American parents (Jus Sanguinis)
    Born in US (Jus Soli)

    These MUST BE MET.Obama can never BE POTUS and never has been.

  17. avatar
    SFJeff June 6, 2010 at 12:48 am #

    “TWO American parents (Jus Sanguinis)
    Born in US (Jus Soli)

    These MUST BE MET.Obama can never BE POTUS and never has been.”

    Darn- why didn’t all of us 69 million voters, Congress or Chief Justice Roberts think of that?

  18. avatar
    Expelliarmus June 6, 2010 at 1:06 am #

    Robert Laity: These MUST BE MET.Obama can never BE POTUS and never has been.

    Damn. Who was that guy on Larry King the other night? And why did Mr. King keep calling him “Mr. President”?

  19. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 6, 2010 at 8:31 am #

    Robert Laity TWO American parents (Jus Sanguinis)
    Born in US (Jus Soli)

    These MUST BE MET.Obama can never BE POTUS and never has been.

    In oral argument of Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS (No. 99-2071), Justice Scalia said:

    Justice Scalia: I’m just referring to the meaning of natural born within the Constitution. I don’t think you’re disagreeing. It requires jus soli, doesn’t it?

  20. avatar
    DaveH June 6, 2010 at 8:59 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: In oral argument of Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS (No. 99-2071), Justice Scalia said:Justice Scalia: I’m just referring to the meaning of natural born within the Constitution. I don’t think you’re disagreeing. It requires jus soli, doesn’t it?

    Everyone here knows for a fact that there are 3 (yes 3) types of citizenship. For your convenience, I have included a link to a super duper chart that explains exactly how a person gets his or her citizenship at birth. It’s from a super duper ‘friend’ of mine that uses the name Silverbull8 (I’m a good enough friend that I can call him Silverballs) and if you don’t like it, then you just need to draw your own graph.

    And, so without any further ado, I present to you for your entertainment:

    “What is a Citizen by Birth Under the 14th Amendment”

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/28422369/What-is-a-US-Citizen-by-Birth

  21. avatar
    BlackLion June 6, 2010 at 10:28 am #

    Robert Laity: TWO American parents (Jus Sanguinis)Born in US (Jus Soli)These MUST BE MET.Obama can never BE POTUS and never has been.

    Wow! The infamous Robert Laity posting here at a non birthers site. By chance did you think you were posting over at the Post and Fail? We have seen some of your more impressive seditious posts. So I guess you are now trolling. You were wrong about the 2 citizen parent requirement as well as everything else. No matter what you think Barack Obama is the President of the United States.

  22. avatar
    Sef June 6, 2010 at 11:02 am #

    Robert Laity: TWO American parents (Jus Sanguinis)
    Born in US (Jus Soli)These MUST BE MET.Obama can never BE POTUS and never has been.

    Wow! Haven’t any of these birthers heard what happened to Rumpelstiltskin in the end?

  23. avatar
    dunstvangeet June 6, 2010 at 11:24 am #

    DaveH:
    Everyone here knows for a fact that there are 3 (yes 3) types of citizenship. For your convenience, I have included a link to a super duper chart that explains exactly how a person gets his or her citizenship at birth. It’s from a super duper friend’ of mine that uses the name Silverbull8 (I’m a good enough friend that I can call him Silverballs) and if you don’t like it, then you just need to draw your own graph.And, so without any further ado, I present to you for your entertainment:“What is a Citizen by Birth Under the 14th Amendment”http://www.scribd.com/doc/28422369/What-is-a-US-Citizen-by-Birth

    Wow. That chart is a bunch of hoopla…

    Just wondering. According to your chart, the children of Rape are not Natural Born Citizens, because no matter what, their parents are not married at the time. Is this what you intended?

    Now, if it is not, then let’s take the same child of rape. Let’s say that the rapist is never found. Is this person a Natural Born Citizen? After all, the child only has one known citizen parent.

    Now, let’s say on their 4th birthday, it was found out that they were raped by a foreigner. Does this child lose her Natural Born Citizenship? After all, it’s now determined that the child’s biological parents were 1 citizen, and 1 foreigner.

    Take the same situation, and then make the rapist a citizen. Does this change whether or not the child, 31 years down the road, can run for the Presidency? According to your chart, it doesn’t. The parents were not married.

    Now, does it matter whether the parents were married before the conception, or after on your chart? My grandfather married my grandmother when my grandmother was pregnant with my father. Is my father a Natural Born Citizen? After all, it requires a marriage between the father, and the mother.

    This graphic is completely worthless. Better place to take a look at who is a Natural Born Citizen is take a look at 8 U.S.C. Sections 1401-1409. Anywhere it says, “is a citizen by birth” means that they are a Natural Born Citizen.

    The graphic that you provided is directly countered by 112 years of U.S. Supreme Court Juris Prudence.

  24. avatar
    Mike June 6, 2010 at 11:29 am #

    Dunst – I think DaveH was making a funny…

  25. avatar
    Lupin June 6, 2010 at 11:31 am #

    DaveH: I present to you for your entertainment:

    For our entertainment indeed. And nothing but. Just like tarot cards and tea leaves.

  26. avatar
    Sef June 6, 2010 at 11:34 am #

    DaveH:
    Everyone here knows for a fact that there are 3 (yes 3) types of citizenship. For your convenience, I have included a link to a super duper chart that explains exactly how a person gets his or her citizenship at birth. It’s from a super duper friend’ of mine that uses the name Silverbull8 (I’m a good enough friend that I can call him Silverballs) and if you don’t like it, then you just need to draw your own graph.And, so without any further ado, I present to you for your entertainment:“What is a Citizen by Birth Under the 14th Amendment”http://www.scribd.com/doc/28422369/What-is-a-US-Citizen-by-Birth

    Lots of people are so impressed by fancy graphics & by anyone who can make them even if the “information” they contain is total hogwash.

  27. avatar
    Sef June 6, 2010 at 11:35 am #

    Mike: Dunst – I think DaveH was making a funny…

    DKos at least has snark tags.