1. Those born of parents who are citizens.

2. A person born of American parents. Thus a person born abroad of American parents, according to the Constitution, would be eligible to the office of President.

3. One whose citizenship is established by the jurisdiction which the United States already has over the parents of the child, not what is thereafter acquired by choice of residence in this country.

4. Those persons born whose father the United States already has an established jurisdiction over, i.e., born to father's who are themselves citizens of the United States.

5. One who is a citizen by no act of law.

If a person owes their citizenship to some act of law, they cannot be considered a natural-born citizen. This leads us to defining natural-born citizen under the laws of nature.

Children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children.

In order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. Vattel, The Law of Nations: I. XIX. § 212.

The Framers were not men who dropped words in by accident. They thought about every word. They argued about every word.

By drawing on the term so well known from English law, the Founders were recognizing the law of hereditary, rather than territorial allegiance. Alexander Porter Morse, "Natural-Born-Citizen of the United States: Eligibility for the Office of President," Albany Law Journal, vol.66 (1904), pp. 99. The framers thought it wise, in view of the probable influx of European immigration, to provide that the President should at least be the child of citizens owing allegiance to the United States at the time of his birth. Morse, op. cit, p. 99.

The presidential eligibility clause was scarcely intended to bar the children of American parentage, whether born at sea or in foreign territory. The Founders and the first Congress, which passed the 1790 Naturalization Act, defined a "natural born" citizen as one whose citizenship is established by the jurisdiction which the United States already has over the parents of the child, not what is thereafter acquired by choice of residence in this country. Morse, op. cit., p. 99. Whoever drew the Act followed closely the various parliamentary statues of Great Britain; and its language in this relation indicates that the first congress entertained and declared that children of American parentage, wherever born, were within the constitutional designation, "natural-born citizens." The act is declaratory: but the reason that such children are natural born remains; that is, their American citizenship is natural -- the result of parentage -- and is not artificial or acquired by compliance with legislative requirements. Morse, op. cit., p. 100.

If the Founders had not wanted an expansive definition of citizenship, it would only have been necessary to say, 'no person, except a native-born citizen.' Morse, op. cit., p. 99.

It should be noted that Morse is reluctant to accept one implication of the dictionary definition of "native-born," namely, that it includes people born in the United States even if their parents are not citizens.

A "natural born citizen" is a person who is entitled under the Constitution or laws of the United States to citizenship “at birth” or “by birth.”

The term includes

(1) a person who is born in the United States, including its territories and possessions and the District of Columbia, and who is subject to its jurisdiction, that is, not born to foreign diplomats or to hostile occupying forces;

(2) a person who is born abroad to two U.S. citizens; and

(3) a person who is born abroad to one U.S. citizen, if that citizen parent has met U.S. residency requirements.

Obama

What is a "natural born" citizen? An obvious interpretation of a "natural born" person would be a child born in the United States to American parents. Likewise, a "naturalized” citizen, that is a person born in a foreign country to foreign parents who later acquired American citizenship through naturalization, would not be eligible to serve as President because that person would not be a “natural born” citizen. What about a child born in a foreign country to American parents?

As Judge Story suggests, the proper way in which to interpret the eligibility clause under the circumstances would be to look at its original purpose, and to adopt that interpretation which "best harmonizes with the nature and objects, the scope and design, of the instrument.” Although the delegates to the Philadelphia Convention and the authors of The Federalist did not discuss at length the eligibility clause, we know from reason and experience, as Story explained, that "the great fundamental policy of all governments" is "to exclude foreign influence from their executive councils." This, he observed, "cuts off all chances for ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe." It was thought dangerous, in other words, to make the presidency available to a person who might have just recent...

1. Those born of parents who are citizens.

2. A person born of American parents. Thus a person born abroad of American parents, according to the Constitution, would be eligible to the office of President.

3. One whose citizenship is established by the jurisdiction which the United States already has over the parents of the child, not what is thereafter acquired by choice of residence in this country.

4. Those persons born whose father the United States already has an established jurisdiction over, i.e., born to father's who are themselves citizens of the United States.

5. One who is a citizen by no act of law.

If a person owes their citizenship to some act of law, they cannot be considered a natural-born citizen. This leads us to defining natural-born citizen under the laws of nature.

Children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children.

In order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. Vattel, The Law of Nations: I. XIX. § 212.

The Framers were not men who dropped words in by accident. They thought about every word. They argued about every word.

By drawing on the term so well known from English law, the Founders were recognizing the law of hereditary, rather than territorial allegiance. Alexander Porter Morse, "Natura...

1. The language of the Constitution is unambiguous. The definition of "natural-born" is Res Ipsa Loquitur, "the thing speaks for itself," not by any statutory definition.

2. Natural-born citizenship is derived through birth to citizen parents. It is founded on, or derived from, the law of nature, not from positive (statutory man-made) law.

3. Congress cannot statutorily create natural-born citizens. 'Natural' is based on natural law, not statute. The same can be said about marriage between man and wife. No law or statute is required to define a natural state.

4. A child born of an American mother and an alien father cannot be a natural born citizen.

5. The term "natural-born" was commonly understood and there was no reason to define the term. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, following the American Revolution, the term was well known to mean those born of citizens, most of whom had yet to be born.

The Constitution is certain and fixed. It contains the permanent will of the people, and is the supreme law of the land. The Constitution is stable and permanent, not to be worked upon by the temper of the times, nor to rise and fall with the tide of events. In expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force, and appropriate meaning; for it is evident from the whole instrument, that no word was unnecessarily used, or needlessly added.

A provision of the Constitution does not admit of two distinctly opposite interpretations...

Religion has been closely identified with our history and government. SCHOOL DIST. OF ABINGTON TP. V. SCHEMPP, 374 U. S. 203 (1963); VAN ORDEN V. PERRY, 545 U.S. 677 (2005). The history of man is inseparable from the history of religion. ENGEL V. VITALE, 370 U. S. 421 (1962); SCHOOL DIST. OF ABINGTON TP. V. SCHEMPP, 374 U. S. 203 (1963).

Our Constitution is a covenant running from the first generation of Americans to us and then to future generations. It is a coherent succession. Each generation must learn anew that the Constitution's written terms embody ideas and aspirations that must survive more ages than one. PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHEASTERN PA. v. CASEY, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).

Covenant is a religious concept, originating in the ancient Near Eastern religions. Covenant is also a critical component of Christianity. Indeed, the very salvation offered through Jesus Christ is called the New Covenant. See, e.g., Luke 22:20. From Christianity, the idea of covenant was adopted by the American Founding Fathers: 'Viewing the United States Constitution as the critical expression of the American constitutional tradition, we move back in time, seeking the less differentiated, more embryonic expression of what is in that document. Our search takes us to the earliest state constitution, then to colonial documents of foundation that are essentially constitutional such as the Pilgrim Code of Law, and then to proto-constitutions such as the Mayflower Compact. The political covenants...