Originally Posted by MinutemanCDC_SC
This issue is resolved and had been for hundreds of years, without question . . . until pirates and brigands hijacked the U.S. ship of state in this century, taking advantage of the dumbing-down of the populace about the U.S. founding documents, including the Constitution.
In 1787 America, the only citizenship that existed was that conferred from the father to the child, if a father existed to confer it. Nothing else mattered.
The identified father's citizenship, through the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" phrase, also guided and restricted Amendment XIV. (See statements about the "jurisdiction" phrase by Sen. Jacob Howard, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, and Rep. John Bingham, the Framers of Amendment XIV.)
U.S. citizenship by jus soli (law of the soil) did not exist for 110 years after the ratification of the Constitution (except for fatherless children) . . . until Wong Kim Ark in 1898. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Melville Fuller and the eminent jurist Associate Justice John Marshall Harlan were out-polled by "Tory" Associate Justice Horace Gray, who re-instituted King George III's "taxation law," an abusive overreach which made anyone born on British soil a taxable subject of the Crown, even those born to foreigners just passing through (except for foreign emissaries).
In the U.S., a woman's citizenship was that of her husband until well into the 20th century. If her husband was not a U.S. citizen, she had no U.S. citizenship of her own to pass along to her children. (Incidentally, this was a strong disincentive for American women to marry foreigners, unlike the opposite incentive today, when a foreigner can gain U.S. citizenship by marriage to a U.S. citizen, and an unmarried American woman can lure a foreign man to the altar with the bait of possible U.S. citizenship.)
The U.S. Constitution, Art. ii, § 1, ¶ 5, reads, "No person except a natural born Citizen... shall be eligible to the Office of President."
To the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, "natural born Citizen" required at least "a citizen born to a citizen father," because that was the only citizenship there was, if there was an identified father. No U.S. Supreme Court decision has ever changed or even challenged that.
Therefore, to settle the current disputes, it is not even necessary to appeal to the established, extant U.S. Supreme Court interpretation from Minor v. Happersett (1875), that is:
"A natural born citizen is
one born in the country
of parents who were citizens."
The Supreme Court has spoken. "It Has Been Decided." According to Stare Decisis, as well as the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution of the United States, as Amended, there is nothing more for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide. Any revision of the "natural born Citizen" phrase in Art. ii, § 1, ¶ 5, requires not just a Senate Resolution, but an Amendment to the Constitution, passed by each chamber of Congress with a 2/3's vote , ratified by 3/4's of the states, and signed by the President (and we don't have one of those, de jure, at this time).