SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR PETITIONER
.
.
Statement of Facts and Assertions Relevant to Issues Presented for Review.
.
.
On or about March 12th, 2009 Representative Bill Posey (FL-15) entered a Bill for congressional consideration designated as H.R. 1503 and Titled;
.
.
"To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution."
.
.
It becomes immediately obvious to any who are familiar with the status of the ‘legal definition of natural born citizen’ that the proposed Bill does absolutely nothing to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Constitutional requirement of the ‘eligibility’ of a candidate for an executive office except as for age and length of residency of the candidate
.
Although with numerous request have been made to Senate and Congressional Representatives, both State and Federal, as of yet not a single Representative has expressed their understanding of the ‘legal definition of natural born citizen’ for the record except as may be found expressed in S. Res. 511.
.
.
Although with numerous request have been made to Senate and Congressional Representatives, both State and Federal, as of yet not a single Representative has expressed their understanding of the ‘legal definition of natural born citizen’ for the record except as may be found expressed in S. Res. 511.
.
Apparently, like pornography, one only knows one when one sees one?
.
.
So the question must be asked, what then is H.R. 1503 seeking to verify with its requirements;
.
.
"…birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution." (?)
.
.
Is it only to verify the candidates age is at least 35 years old and that the candidate has been ‘fourteen years a resident within the United States’?
.
.
It is clear from the text of the Bill H.R. 1503 that there is no effort is to identify the definition of a natural born citizen, in that there are no words that specifically say so. But then the Congressional Finding is clear in the understanding that being a natural born citizen is a significant requirement of eligibility;
.
.
SECTION 1. FINDING.
Congress finds that under section 5 of article II of the Constitution of the United States, in order to be eligible to serve as President, an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 35 years and has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years.
.
Congress finds that under section 5 of article II of the Constitution of the United States, in order to be eligible to serve as President, an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 35 years and has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years.
.
Many of the facts that H.R. 1503 seeks to verify are ascertainable from analyzing the birth certificates issued under the authority of and in compliance with the Federal Security Agency - U. S. Public Health Service, ("Reorganization Act of 1939" (P.L. 19, 76th Cong., 1st sess.), and/or its successor agencies. These Birth Certificates provides for the birthplace of the parents, father and mother, as well as the child’s, providing citizenship status of each of them by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, under its current authority, at the minimum.
.
.
However, when looking at historical records, the status of a child born within the jurisdiction of the United States to two citizen parents, father and mother, that child’s birth right citizenship has not been subject of dispute nor considered anything other than a natural born citizen [88 U.S. 162, 168], just as the Senate concluded in S.Res.511, although there is some lingering uncertainty regarding ‘Jurisdiction’ in Senator McCain’s birth circumstance.
.
.
It appears, when reviewing the historical considerations of American citizenship found in the Legislation of Acts, Bills, Amendments and Judicial Opinions, that the uncertainties in defining of the nature of American citizenship, in general, and an American natural born citizen, specifically, turns on the interpretations of;
.
.
"…and subject to the jurisdiction thereof…",
.
.
and;
.
.
"…allegiance…"
.
.
But that uncertainty would be resolved when the full import of "The Preamble to the Constitution" is viewed with it’s apparent investment and assignment of both Jurisdiction and Allegiance into the Constitution its self and the derived Citizenship of "We, the People of the United States" from it;
.
.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
.
.
The poetic clarity is too plain to ignore and word by word parsing does nothing to diminish the obvious, that the Constitution IS the United States of America, that which, with It’s (the Constitutions) words, defines the extent of Jurisdictions of the United States of America, that being to We the People.
.
.
In whatever measure we secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity, it is from It (the Constitution) and therefore we owe our Allegiance to It (the Constitution). From that Allegiance is found both the constraining and expansive limits of Jurisdiction to be determined by the contemplative Laws of the Constitutionally guaranteed Republican form of government guaranteed and provided to all accepted into It’s (the Constitution’s) Jurisdiction with, then, Allegiance to be owed to It (the Constitution).
.
.
The Preamble is Positive Declaratory Statement of the collective, stating who they were and what was being set about for their selves and the generations which would spring from their endeavors with the binding propositions,
.
.
The Preamble explains the purposes of the Constitution, and defines the powers of the new government as originating from the people of the United States.
http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm
.
.
Although this short descriptive offers little more than a dictionary definition it contains all of the dispositive elements supporting the ‘investment and assignment of allegiance and jurisdiction’ to the Constitution in and of its-self with both the Land and the Peoples thereof being the beneficiaries of it’s adoption and establishment.
.
.
Given that, after 222 years, the definition of ‘natural born citizen’ has not been codified it would be poetic Justice now for this Court, now, to rely on the Preamble to the Constitution to find the meaning and vision of the Framers when contemplating the nature and Constitutional Vision of the American Citizens. That New Nation was founded upon their ‘allegiance’ to a ‘new purpose of government’, mixed with their spilled ‘blood’ in the conflict to secure the soil, the foothold and beachhead, of the new form of Jurisdiction, the New Constitution, of the People, by the People and for the People, endeavoring to ‘establish Justice, insure Domestic Tranquility, provide for the Common Defense, promote the General Welfare by and amongst the People that would call this new notion and vision of self government so Ordained and Established, The United States of America by those of the Original States and by those, so accepted, thereafter.
.
.
This view was, again poetically, expressed by Francis Bellamy when he wrote the "Pledge of Allegiance" in 1892;
.
.
"I Pledge Allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
.
.
And amended several times until The U.S. Congress officially recognized the Pledge as the official national pledge on June 22, 1942 in its current form;
.
.
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all"
.
The Court, with indulgence, may agree that it is unnecessary to list the numerous instances of the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch and this Judicial Branch having extended their Jurisdiction into foreign lands supporting the proposition that ‘America is where the American Citizen is’, and simply state the obvious that even though that citizen may not, on their own, be able to secure their ‘rights and privileges’ where ever they may be outside the physical boundaries of the United States, still the United States reserves the right to ‘reach out’ and ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the rights and privileges of that citizen.
.
.
The Court, with indulgence, may agree that it is unnecessary to list the numerous instances of the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch and this Judicial Branch having extended their Jurisdiction into foreign lands supporting the proposition that ‘America is where the American Citizen is’, and simply state the obvious that even though that citizen may not, on their own, be able to secure their ‘rights and privileges’ where ever they may be outside the physical boundaries of the United States, still the United States reserves the right to ‘reach out’ and ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the rights and privileges of that citizen.
.
Therefore an American citizens allegiance must be considered as "…and subject to the jurisdiction thereof…" being of the Constitution and not to a piece of land, or a State, ( 83 U.S. 36 [p74]), whether within the physical boundaries of jurisdiction or without.
.
.
When outside the physical boundaries, then Citizenship is carried as if the soil of America, being the fibers of the Constitution, is mixed within that citizens own blood so that where ever they are found, there too is found an honored piece of America, that space that an American Citizen occupies, [88 U.S. 162, 166] (83 U.S. 36 [p80]).
.
.
But then there are instances when Allegiance is questioned noting that one can not read minds and hearts so as to allow determination of where that Allegiance resides. This then is where the definition of an American Citizen and the English Common Law definitions governing Citizenship and Subjects depart from one another and where the divide between an American citizen and an American natural born citizen is found. Where the English Law allows for alienation’s to be found in the hearts and minds of their Colonial subjects within the places and in the customs of their Colonial subjects forefathers, never the less, Allegiance to the Crown is imposed upon those Citizen Subjects by both imposed force and imposed Law.
.
.
In contrast, the American naturalized citizen gives an Oath of Allegiance freely and without mental reservations when citizenship is granted;
.
.
(8 C.F.R. Part 337 (2008))
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."
.
.
When citizenship is obtained by the 14th Amendment to one traveling through (in transitu) or newly arrived (immigrant) or of parents not both citizens, the allegiance of one so born is assumed from the natural attachment to the soil, being the construct of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, yet still remains subject to the election of citizenship options which may be made by their, then, non-citizen parent(s). Although the result of the decision within United States v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649 ‘imposed’ citizenship upon all persons born within the physical jurisdiction of America, the right of ‘affirmative renunciation’ remains.
.
.
Then to the American natural born citizen, who possess no alienation of allegiance at birth, being of two American citizen parents, receives their citizenship as a natural birthright emanating from the jurisdictional allegiance of the citizen parents. Here, allegiance can be assumed to grow through the allegiance held by their fathers (parents). [88 U.S. 162, 166] (Vattel: Bk 1 Ch. 19 § 212.)
.
.
This is not guaranteed, given the nature of life, but more often than not it is true, when that which has been honored by the fathers (parents) finds favor with the child when raised amongst the continued good governance and liberties under the terms of the societal (Constitutional) contract.
.
.
This was the natural state understood and acknowledged by the Framers when considering the qualifications of the various Representatives and Executive Officers.
.
.
Being that ‘all politics is local’ the Representatives sent to the Halls of the Federal Government were to be chosen by their local electorate, who could best know their hearts and minds, hence the lower threshold of qualification for eligibility.
.
.
But when considering those whose hand would be at the tiller of the ‘Ship of State’ and upon whose voice the Military would rise to commands to take actions, no limits of qualification or scrutiny of character and allegiance are sufficient, but without additional alternatives or options, the most indispensable of qualifications was for the Executive Officers to be an unadulterated natural born citizen and this was seen to be wise and prudent measure;
.
.
Story, Joseph. Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Boston, 1833. § 1473.
[I]t is indispensable, too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States; or a citizen at the adoption of the constitution, and for fourteen years before his election. This permission of a naturalized citizen to become president is an exception from the great fundamental policy of all governments, to exclude foreign influence from their executive councils and duties. It was doubtless introduced (for it has now become by lapse of time merely nominal, and will soon become wholly extinct)……………………[B]ut the general propriety of the exclusion of foreigners, in common cases, will scarcely be doubted by any sound statesman. It 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,…[e]xamples of the enduring mischiefs arising from this source…"
.
.
And as expressed by John Bingham in the United States House on March 9, 1866 (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
.
.
"I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that 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…"
.
.
Regarding H.R. 133;
"To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to deny citizenship at birth to children born in the United States of parents who are not citizens or permanent resident aliens."
and H.R. 1490;
"To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth."
.
.
Although both Bills seek to end the "Birth Right" citizenship grant assumed by the 14th Amendment that has been extended to illegal and/or undocumented aliens (169 U.S. 649) each of the Bills turn on the interpretation of;
.
.
"... and subject to the jurisdiction thereof…"
.
The proposition of the nature of citizenship being derived from the Preamble to the Constitution suggests that ‘Allegiance and Jurisdiction’ are indivisible. When there is divided and/or no allegiance assumed to the Jurisdiction (Constitution), then Citizenship is subject to Judicial interpretations and Legislative grants and by the election of citizenship options available to the parent(s), while in the alternative, when allegiance of the parents is unadulterated at birth the ‘rights and privileges’ of citizenship confers, naturally, to the natural born citizen, regardless of the jurisdiction (beyond the physical boundaries of the USA) subject only to the purpose of parents travel, either temporary and fugitive purpose, in transitu or the intent of general inhabitancy abroad, animo manendi. . (S.Res.511) ( 88 U.S. 162 )
.
Petitioner asserts that the nature, and therefore the definition, of a Natural Born Citizen is, and should be declared as;
.
.
The proposition of the nature of citizenship being derived from the Preamble to the Constitution suggests that ‘Allegiance and Jurisdiction’ are indivisible. When there is divided and/or no allegiance assumed to the Jurisdiction (Constitution), then Citizenship is subject to Judicial interpretations and Legislative grants and by the election of citizenship options available to the parent(s), while in the alternative, when allegiance of the parents is unadulterated at birth the ‘rights and privileges’ of citizenship confers, naturally, to the natural born citizen, regardless of the jurisdiction (beyond the physical boundaries of the USA) subject only to the purpose of parents travel, either temporary and fugitive purpose, in transitu or the intent of general inhabitancy abroad, animo manendi. . (S.Res.511) ( 88 U.S. 162 )
.
Petitioner asserts that the nature, and therefore the definition, of a Natural Born Citizen is, and should be declared as;
.
"A Natural Born Citizen of America is a person being born within the Natural Birth Right Privileges enjoyed by all American Citizens, that being of American Citizen Parents, being a Father and a Mother, however their citizenship was derived, with each being with Allegiance to the Constitution and without alienation of allegiance being owed to any other Jurisdiction, investing into their children, by natural laws and of the Constitution, the bound Citizenship of such Parents."
.
.
"Maintenance of the Birth Right Privilege is the obligation of the Parents in the circumstance of Birth within the Jurisdiction of Foreign Lands with and by the Laws of United States Citizenship promulgated to regulate such circumstances."
