Who is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States of America

A "Natural born citizen" is a concept belonging to Natural Law, which became the most controversial in the moment (2008). This concept is used in the Constitution of the
US (Article II, Section 1, #4) as a precondition for presidency – and only for presidency, as enhanced citizenship clearly distinguished from ordinary citizenship. It has not been defined in the Constitution nor in any later statutes, because it had been self evident in the time when the Constitution was written, codified in the then contemporary encyclopedia "Law of Nations" (1758) by Emerich de Vattel. (As a legal source, "Law of Nations" is mentioned in Article I, Section 8, #10 of the Constitution in respect to the authority of the US Congress to enforce the law of nations, in particular – against piracies and felonies on high seas).

According to Chapter 19, §212 of "Law of Nations", "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country of parents who are citizens". The concept "Natural born citizen" is a twofold criterion meaning that: 


Both parents must be the citizens of the country, and the birth must take place in the country, assuming that the citizenship inherited by this child and the loyalty are never changed ever after.

In other words, a natural born citizen means at least a second generation citizen of the country. Vattel's own note on the margin  of his book refers to the Roman law: NEMO
PLUS JURIS TRANSFERRE POTEST, QUAM IPSE HABET, meaning "No one can give more rights than he himself has" (by Dr. A. Altec). Except for Obama/Soetoro, the Vattel definition had been always presumed up to the US Senate resolution 511 in 2008 (also here and here) acknowledging Sen. McCain as though a natural born citizen:

... Whereas John Sidney McCain,
III, was born to American citizens on an American military base...

Indeed, the goal of the Sen. Res. 511 was not to refresh the brain dead America about the concept of the US Natural Born as defined in Law of Nations by Vattel. Its goal was merely to justify campaigning of McCain (which did not qualify because he was born in Panama's hospital rather than on American soil or an area under American jurisdiction). In doing so, the authors inadvertently revealed what they knew and kept in mind – the two-fold requirement of the definition of Vattel, though not mentioning it explicitly. (See below how the US Congress had tried to rid of this Constitutional requirementfor presidency years prior to emergence of Obama).  


The Supreme Court has acknowledged "Natural Born" as born to citizen parents on American soil four times, or in four different decisions, in our history: 1814, 1830, 1875, and 1898. In each case, the justices referred to Vattel's Law of Nations, clearly understanding our founding fathers' source and intent in adding these requirements to our Constitution for President and Vice President, and copied the applicable passages out of Vattel's book in their opinions (Farile). For example, it was acknowledged as a side ruling in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 1875. It is a side acknowledgment because the case was not about a qualification of the plaintiff for presidency.


So far (2008), no case directly questioning qualification of a presidential contender had ever been filed or heard, and for quite obvious reasons. Before 2008 the parties promoting presidential contenders, the Congress, and state secretaries had always followed and upheld the Vattel concept of the Natural born so there was no need for court hearings.

What happened in 2008 and 2012 was the first incident of such a violation committed by both parties, all secretaries of states, electoral college, and the US Congress. Many court cases had been filed, but sabotaged or grossly misjudged. A few of them (filed by Dr. Taitz) had reached the Supreme court and were sabotaged too.

It had been presumed and practiced, that the enforcement of the constitutional requirements and vetting of presidential contenders must happen within the competing political parties. Then presidential contenders submitted their party backed applications to state secretaries in every state, and the secretaries ought to verify the papers against the constitutional requirements. However for Obama, the Democrat party (with silent agreement and cooperation of Republican and other parties) submitted, and all the secretaries of states accepted the forged documents and applications for candidacy invalid on their face – as this outline describes. Since then denial and obfuscation of every aspect of the illegal presidency became as though a taboo.

In obfuscating public discussion, often enough the Natural born citizenship was (deliberately) confused with acts of naturalization of common law, say with  §1401 of the US Code "Nationals and citizens of United States at birth". Although the words sound similar, §1401 defines only ordinary citizenship including such shallow one as that of anchor babies (i.e. born to legal guests of the country, §1401(a), never mind illegal residents).

The Constitution clearly and explicitly excludes ordinary citizenship for presidency: ordinary citizenship was reserved only for the presidential candidates – contemporaries of the Framers (referred as the grandfather clause). This fact alone indicates that the "Natural born citizenship" is not the same as ordinary citizenship, but something stronger. However, by not explicitly quoting the Vattel's definition, the Constitution therefore leaves some room for confusions(*).

The Framers (in their correspondence) explicitly wished to exclude dual loyalty, and explicitly required that the
US citizenship of the president be stronger than ordinary citizenship (such as that of their contemporaries). After all, any one can acquire an ordinary US citizenship (via naturalization) in some point of one's life, so the Framers clearly excluded this kind of citizenship. On the contrary, the Natural Born Citizenship cannot be acquired: it may be only inherited.


After the Framers, all the presidential contenders prior to 2008 did officially satisfy this definition, demonstrating continuity of the meaning "Natural born citizenship" consistent with that of Vattel . (In the past only one President Chester Arthur 1881-1885 violated it, hiding and destroying the traces of the British citizenship of his father, discovered only after Chester Arthur's death. The carefully hidden violation of Chester Arthur in fact is an additional argument that the Vattel's definition was valid and he was aware of it).


The continuity and understanding of the Vattel meaning of the Natural born citizenship held intact since the Founders up to 2008. Not only was it well understood, but some legislators disliked what they well understood, because the Vattel's definition stood on the way of certain "planers" long before emergence of Obama. Already since 2002 some members of the US Congress (Democrats and Republicans both) had made many attempts to rid of the concept Natural Born Citizen, which all have failed (here, here, here, and here – the research of J.B. Williams). Here is the list of those attempts:


H.J.R. 33 (1975) 
H.J.R. 38 (1977)
H.J.R 59 (2003)
H.J.R. 67 (2003)
S.2128 (2004)
H.J.R. 104 (2004)
H.J.R. 2 (2005)
H.J.R. 15 (2005)
H.J.R. 42  (2005)
S.2678 (2008).

Therefore in 2008 and 2012, by approving Obama's presidency, all branches of the US government simply violated the Constitution, created a precedent and therefore de-facto have changed the Constitution without any due constitutional process. It was "The Audacity of Dope", rephrasing the notorious book title.


Contrary to the case of Arthur in the 19th century, in 2008 nobody even attempted to hide the foreign citizenship of Obama's biological father – an open into the face overt violation of the Constitution. Worse, no personal documents of Obama at all have been ever verified. The perpetrators and enablers have been the media, both big and all the small parties, plus the three branches of government, who overlooked and orchestrated ascendance of the impostor into the White House – while the majority of American people didn't care, were hoodwinked, or brain dead.  


This brain dead crowd still maintains the consensus of silencing and suppression of the truth, cheering the procession and wonderful clothes of the proverbial Emperor without clothes, while the cheer leaders keep an eye on those attempting to speak out the truth. 

The former bright city on the hill turned into a despicable laughing stock for the entire world;

Into a chess board with the situation of checkmate, yet the winning side refraining to checkmate;

Into a poker game against a brazen bluffer whom nobody ever demanded to open his cards.



1) With only one parent American citizen (the mother) and the father – a foreigner (according to the official bio), Obama/Soetoro is definitely not a natural born citizen no matter where he was born and what was in his hidden full birth certificate.  

2) His Indonesian upbringing and citizenship had abrogated his natural born American citizenship (if it were valid). Getting back to
America he might become only a naturalized citizen: definitely not natural born

3) Obama's authentic birth certificate at best can only prove him to be an ordinary
U.S. citizen according to §1401(a): definitely not a natural born U.S. citizen. (Fixation on his hidden birth certificate was misguiding, just like the pejorative term "birther", invented by those who want to deflect attention from the obvious issues lying on the very surface and not requiring any birth certificate).

4) On the top of it, Obama is a plain fraudster . He had obtained an invalid Social Security number 042-68-4425, that he currently uses. It was issued in the state of CT to an individual born in 1890. Obama illegally assumed this number, as Dr. Taitz and her collaborators have discovered. His 2011 copy of the full birth certificate appeared to be a coarse forgery. The head of the
Hawaii department of Health Ms. Loretta Fuddy who provided Obama with this coarse forgery of the BC in 2011, happened to be the only victim of a non-fatal (staged?) plane crash on water in 2013. She died (and was hastily cremated) while nobody was even injured.


Frequently Posted Objections of Obots

(the sincere "believers" or trolls)

1. Objection. Law of Nations by Vattel is "international law" therefore irrelevant in deciding America's constitutional questions.

   Answer. We resort to Law of Nations only as to a Dictionary of concepts used by the Founders. It was their decision to write into the Constitution the requirement "Natural born" borrowed from Law of Nation, therefore it became our law since then.


2. Objection. Law of Nations by Vattel is merely a political philosophy having no bearing on American Constitution.  

   Answer. The same as 1.


3. Objection. America's constitution and laws mimic the English common law, according to which citizenship of a person follows from his birth place solely. The concept "Natural born" therefore means "born on American soil", and that's enough.

   Answer. The concept "Natural born citizenship" is not the same as "common citizenship" in the English common law. It's a stronger type of citizenship which the Founders reserved only for presidency. There is no indication in their writing or other sources of their time as though they meant that "Natural born citizenship" equals to "English common citizenship" based on the birth place solely. The Founders clearly meant that the parents of presidents be American citizens. Realizing that themselves they cannot meet this condition, they wrote the so called grandparent clause into the Constitution to make exception for themselves, because though they were born on the soil of America, they obviously could not have the American citizen parents.  


4. Objection. The language of the 2008 Senate Resolution 511 on McCain in the following line: 


…Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base...


merely states the personal circumstances of McCain (really born to both American citizens), just as if it stated a few other particularities of the newborn like being a boy, having particular weight, eye color, and so on. This phrase in the resolution has nothing to do with "born to citizen parents on the soil" from Law of Nations.

   Answer. The authors of the Sen. Res. 511 were intelligent enough to realize that personal particularities of a newborn are irrelevant for the Constitutional requirements. They included into the Resolution the criterion which they believed was relevant – and it happened to be that from Law of Nations.


5. Objection. The fact, that all presidents after the Founders and up before Obama did satisfy the criterion "born to citizen parents on the soil" does not illustrate the continuity of understanding and fulfillment of the concept Natural Born meant in the Constitution. The fact that they all matched this criterion was just a coincidence irrelevant to the Constitutional meaning of Natural Born. It's the same coincidence like that all of the former presidents were white males.

   Answer. It's a damn law probability that 40 presidents in 200 years all happened to meet the Law of Nation criterion by chance. The Law of Nation criterion was what the Founders meant and wrote into the Constitution, understood as such and disliked as such by those who had attempted to amend it (see above). That is why all presidents prior to Obama did satisfy it.


6. Objection. There were plenty of cases in the past concerning (ordinary, common) citizenship, in which side opinions were filed as though Natural born citizenship follows merely from the birth on the soil (like in British law).    

   Answer. As the answer 3 shows, the Founders clearly meant the Law of Nation definition. As to side opinions in various court trials…

a)      No court trial in the US history has ever heard a case questioning Natural born citizenship of a plaintiff for being a presidential candidate. All such cases decided only common citizenship of plaintiffs, and the rulings contained explanation of various types of citizenship including the Natural born. In 4 of such side opinions the explanation of the Natural Born was identical to Law of Nations, in a few others – otherwise.

b)      Even if a case about Natural born citizenship as a qualification for presidency had been heard and decided in favor of a particular definition, the court ruling is not a law, but merely a precedent for future similar cases. Even then, in future hearing of such cases, a precedent is not a law, but only an argument in deliberations, which may be accepted or not. As no court hearing on qualifications of Obama had been ever heard in merits, referring to any side opinions in the past is pointless.

c)      Qualifications of candidates for presidency are supposed to be weighed by parties based on Constitution and laws, not precedents. The Constitution and the terminology used in it clearly prescribes the concept of the Natural Born according to Law of Nations, as it was maintained up to the 2008 Sen. Res. 511.

See also http://puzo1.blogspot.com  Mario Apuzzo, Esq

http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams300.htm   (J.B. Williams, End of American Presidency)

(*)  There was only one occasion when the term Natural Born Citizenship was spelled out, though in inappropriate place – in a legislation concerning the Naturalization law in the 1st Congress Act of 1790. As this Natural Law term slipped into a section of the common law of naturalization erroneously, it was repealed already in the 1795 Act and never reused again with such a purpose.