Check the answer book
Parody Civics book
I have had commenters here swear that they were taught in their high school Civics class that (a) anyone born in the United States could be President or (b) only those born in the United States to citizen parents could be president.
Now I personally don’t remember the subject coming up at all, but then that was a very long time ago and I don’t remember a lot of high school anyway. I think high school classes pretty much follow high school text books, and so the truth of the matter probably lies in those books. So I offer this challenge:
Come up with a text book published in the last 100 years that explains US presidential eligibility and in particular, what “natural born citizen” means.
Please, verifiable entries only.
I realize that a high school text book will not settle the legal question, but it will help settle the question of what the expectations of the American people were prior to the current marketing effort supporting a certain view.
Jon Stewart’s book, America (the book) Teacher’s Edition: A Citizen’s Guide to Democracy Inaction (2004), pictured above, does address the question by saying:
You must be a native citizen of the United States. Very important. Imagine having fought for years to win your independence from England only to have King George get on the ballot and win. Very embarrassing. (Page 40)
Stewart, as many writers and court decisions have, uses the phrase “native” and “natural” interchangeably.
More international law on citizenship
Continuing our series on international law and citizenship, we introduce the book International Law (1904) by John Westlake, Professor of International Law, Cambridge University. The section on citizenship is very long and the following is but a small part, selected for its particular relevance from Chapter 10.
Who are Nationals Jus soli and jus sanguinis
Historically nationality arose out of allegiance. The sovereign lords in the dealings between whom international law had its origin belonged to a system of which the dominant character was feudal and in feudalism the personal relation of a man to his lord was blended with the territorial relation of a fief to the lordship of which it was held. By virtue of the latter the personal relation to the lord was imposed on all natives of the fief or of the country considered as a collection of fiefs and this jus soli was not inconvenient because few persons were to be met with in any country who had not been born in it except traders and other obviously casual visitors. It was therefore on birth on the soil or on certain circumstances equivalent to birth on the soil that the character of a natural born subject primarily depended. By the common law of England which fairly represents the old common law of western and central Europe on the matter allegiance was due to the king from all persons born on land within his dominions with the exceptions presently to be mentioned or in foreign harbours on board an English ship of war or packet enjoying the immunities of a ship of war or at sea on board an English ship and from children born abroad to a duly accredited English ambassador or minister, but not from children born on foreign soil to English soldiers or sailors…. (more…)
Thomas Jefferson on “Natural Born”
Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson in December, 1783, wrote these notes to Congress [emphasis in the original]:
Qu. 1. Can an American citizen, adult, now inherit lands in England?
Natural subjects can inherit–Aliens cannot.
There is no middle character–every man must be the one or the other of these.
A Natural subject is one born within the king’s allegiance & still owing allegiance. No instance can be produced in the English law, nor can it admit the idea of a person’s being a natural subject and yet not owing allegiance.
An alien is the subject or citizen of a foreign power.
The treaty of peace acknowleges we are no longer to owe allegiance to the king of G.B. It acknowleges us no longer as Natural subjects then.
It makes us citizens of independent states; it makes us aliens then.
A treaty with a foreign nation where the king’s powers are competent to it as in this which is a case of peace & war, supersedes all law.
If the king’s powers were not competent before, the act of parliament of 1782 has made them so. An American citizen adult cannot inherit then.Qu.2. The father a British subject; the son in America, adult, and within the description of an American citizen, according to their laws. Can the son inherit?
He owes no allegiance to Great B. The treaty acknowleges he does not. But allegiance is the test of a natural subject. Were he to do an act here which would be treason in a British subject he could not be punished should he happen to go there. (more…)
Town v. Town
Hartford v. Canaan
The place was Connecticut; the year was 1886; the issue was money; the case: Town of New Hartford v. Town of Canaan, 5 A. 360 (Conn. 1886).
Lafayette Parrott was born in Massachusetts in 1836 to a resident alien father (the father later naturalized). Lafayette Parrott lived in various locations, ending up in in New Hartford, CT–where he fell on hard times. He claimed poverty and received financial support from the Town of New Hartford, but that town claimed that Mr. Parrott was really the responsibility of the Town of Canaan, and sued to recover its expenses.
Now it is not at all clear from the case description why the Town of Canaan was singled out as the “place of settlement” of Mr. Parrott, and that is not particularly relevant to our discussion here. What is relevant is that the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors held that Lafayette Parrott was a citizen of the United States from his birth (even though he was of an alien father). Further the court said that the election of citizenship when a child with dual citizenship reaches majority, “relates back to the time of his birth”. The court provides a wonderful legal survey of the law regarding citizenship in the United States.
There is just too much here to summarize in a few words, so sit back for some extensive citations. (more…)
The Toilet Paper Shortage of 2009
Charley’s Blog contains a memory from my teenage years about the Great Toilet Paper Shortage of 1974.
No, this is not a joke but it started as one. Back in ‘74 when rationing and shortages were the standard of the day, thank you Jimmy Carter [actually 1974 was Nixon/Ford time] , Johnny Carson was making comment of this in his monologue on the Tonight Show. (more…)
