CDR Kerchner (Ret)'s Blog – Protect the Constitution to Protect Our Liberty – Learn Who Is a "Natural Born Citizen" to Constitutional Standards

A Brief Review of Nationality Law | by Leonard Daneman

A Brief Review of Nationality Law | by Leonard Daneman | @ ThePostEmail.com

John A. Bingham, Congressman, Judge Advocate, and principal framer of the 14th Amendment (public domain)

(Mar. 20, 2026) — Author’s Note: If parents have existing foreign citizenship, the 14th Amendment ‘born in the United States’ citizenship at birth clause DOES NOT APPLY to their children. WHY? Because the child already has the citizenship of their parents. The 14th Amendment was drafted from the 1866 Civil Rights Act to ‘cure’ stateless children whose parents had no nationality to confer, NOT to create ‘dual’ or ‘hybrid’ citizens which is a Conflict of Law.

Modern nationality law began in the 1700’s, changing with the age of exploration, colonization, and the decline of feudal monarchies.

The jus feudalis ‘feudal’ law of jus soli (law of the soil) was replaced with jus sanguinis (law of blood), and this new standard was adopted by the United States, Great Britain and France.

A significant case relying on the jus soli, place of birth citizenship applied in common law, was the 1789 ‘Case of Mr. Smith,’ argued by James Madison. Madison won his case, that a colonial born child who grew up in England, his parents never allegiant to the United States, could claim the right to political office only for the fact he was born in one of the colonies, i.e., native-born. His opponent argued that he and his parents never naturalized or declared allegiance to the Declaration of Independence, as they were living in England. … continue reading at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2026/03/20/a-brief-review-of-nationality-law/

# # #

Quotable Quotes: The chief author of the 14th Amendment, Sen. John A. Bingham, wrote: “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866), Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes (1866) … see more quotes regarding citizenship, citizenship kinds, and allegiance at: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2024/06/14/quotable-quotes-re-citizenship-kinds-allegiance-and-the-presidential-eligibility-clause-in-the-united-states-constitution/

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Author: “Natural Born Citizen”
and “Kerchner v Obama – The Advertorial Campaign“
https://www.kerchner.com/books/catalog.htm
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
https://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty/lists
http://www.protectourliberty.org

The Birthright Citizenship Homestretch | by Joseph DeMaio

The Birthright Citizenship | by Joseph DeMaio | @ ThePostEmail.com

(Mar. 20, 2026) — As we enter the final days leading up to the oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara, it may be prudent to review the briefs on the merits of President Trump and his opponents, as well as the myriad amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs that have been filed.

To begin with, as your humble servant has posited here, the merits Opening Brief of the President, authored by Solicitor General D. John Sauer, is not merely persuasive, it is compelling. Read it for yourself. And as for the opposition’s merits brief, your servant has made his views known here. To summarize the opposition’s position: “Since we’ve been doing it wrong for so long, it would be inconvenient and unreasonable to make us do it right into the future.”

*https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-365/392842/20260127175852031_Trump%20v%20Barbara%20-%20Wurman%20Amicus%20Brief%20-%20FINAL.pdf*

In plain English, General Sauer’s merits Opening Brief clearly articulates what the authors of the 14^th Amendment meant and intended when they conditioned the creation of “birthright citizenship” in children born here to be “subject to the complete political jurisdiction” of the United States. They did not intend mere birth here to a non-resident, non-domiciled illegal alien mother to be all that was needed. Indeed, the crucial element of domicile is further emphasized – and with identical compelling impact – in General Sauer’s just filed merits Reply Brief.

While various other amici curiae opposing President Trump seek to perpetuate the mistaken, unconstitutional and even disingenuous policy of “birth tourism” fostered and exacerbated by the regime of “Robinette the Marionette” – aka “Dr. Jill’s meal ticket” – General Sauer’s Opening Brief explains why precisely the opposite intent was at the core of the amendment’s authors…, and it isn’t even close.

Confirming the “not even close” gibberish of most of the amicus briefs opposing President Trump are the sob story fabrications of the SEIU amicus curiae, dismantled here. While your servant has suggested that, under Supreme Court Rules, the SEIU brief might well qualify to be stricken, leaving it as part of the record in the case could instead serve the purpose of underscoring the desperation and intellectual flailing of those opposing President Trump’s Executive Order 14160. Your servant calls it “intellectual flailing;” General Sauer calls it “gerrymandering the definition of jurisdiction….” (See Reply Brief at 14). … continue reading at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2026/03/20/the-birthright-citizenship-homestretch/

# # #

Exclusive: Yahoo AI: Vattel “Primary Authority” on “natural born Citizen”

Exclusive: Yahoo AI: Vattel “Primary Authority” on “natural born Citizen” | by Sharon Rondeau | @ ThePostEmail.com

(Feb. 26, 2026) — On Wednesday, “Scout,” Yahoo!’s artificial intelligence tool, asserted to longtime P&E reader Creg Maroney that Emmerich de Vattel is “the primary legal authority” on the Article II term “natural born Citizen.”

The Framers settled on just three requirements for the President and Commander-in-Chief contained in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Maroney opened his conversation with Scout with the query, “anchor baby goes to supreme court,” which prompted it to provide a summary of the “birthright citizenship” case the U.S. Supreme Court will hear on April 1. … continue reading at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2026/02/26/exclusive-yahoo-ai-vattel-primary-authority-on-natural-born-citizen/

# # #

Congressman Invokes Omar’s U.S. Citizenship — or Lack Thereof

Congressman Invokes Omar’s U.S. Citizenship — or Lack Thereof | by Sharon Rondeau | @ ThePostEmail.com

by Sharon Rondeau

(Feb. 21, 2026) — During the final hour of Saturday morning’s edition of “Fox & Friends,” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN2), who last month called for a subpoena for Rep. Ilhan Omar’s immigration records, specifically told the three co-hosts that questions regarding Omar’s “immigration” status stem from whether her father naturalized.

Omar (D-MN5) is serving her third term in the U.S. House of Representatives following one term in the Minnesota House.

It was the first time, to this writer’s knowledge, that Omar’s father’s naturalization was identified as the fulcrum on which the congresswoman’s legal status rests. Burchett added that if Omar were found to have obtained her House seat lacking U.S. citizenship, she would be expelled from Congress.

Article I, Section 2 requires all members of Congress to be U.S. citizens. … continue reading the rest of this article at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2026/02/21/congressman-invokes-omars-u-s-citizenship-or-lack-thereof/

# # #