How the social contract theory reveals the meaning of natural born Citizen
The U.S. constitution has been referred to as a social contract. The Founding Fathers granted state and federal governments with certain powers, but retained the rest. Two of governments' main powers are called its police powers: 1) the power to prohibit injurious behavior, which is to be adjudicated in the judicial branch, and 2) the power to regulate commerce, which is done in the executive branch. The 9th Amendment says that those powers not granted to government are reserved to the people.
In exchange for the grant of police powers, these republican governments promised to secure the reserved rights of citizens, which are natural rights. One of these natural rights is the right of all natural born Citizens to either run for President or to have a natural born Citizen as President. Another is the right of U.S. citizen fathers to convey U.S. citizenship and to be the sole source of natural born Citizens. The U.S. constitution, by means of the natural born Citizen clause at Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, establishes and secures these three natural political rights.
On the other hand, the U.S. constitution does not secure the political rights of foreign fathers or foreign citizens. This is because such foreigners are not parties to the contract, called the U.S. constitution. Contracts secure the rights of parties to the contacts, but not the rights of non-parties. Thus, the U.S. constitution does not secure the natural right to run for President to an offspring of a foreign father because foreign fathers are not parties to the contract.
Because the U.S. constitution does not secure the citizenship rights of the offspring of foreign fathers, the constitution grants Congress with the power to secure citizenship rights to such people through naturalization. Such artificial man-made citizenship is based on the foreign offspring's place of birth on U.S. soil or on the U.S. nationality of the foreign offspring's mother. Such a child is born foreign by birth and is naturalized as a Citizens of the United States at birth.
So, given the logic of this social contract argument, how can anyone believe that the offspring of foreign fathers can be natural born Citizens who are eligible to be a U.S. President? The constitution owes the children of foreign fathers no such rights, and Congress may not grant them.
The rights to run for President and to be the source of U.S. Presidents are natural, as secured by the U.S. constitution. To equate foreign offspring with native offspring, which is to equate Citizens of the United States with natural born Citizens, is to overthrow the republican form of government and to force natural citizens into a religious non-republic that is unable to define citizenship rights naturally and objectively.
In exchange for the grant of police powers, these republican governments promised to secure the reserved rights of citizens, which are natural rights. One of these natural rights is the right of all natural born Citizens to either run for President or to have a natural born Citizen as President. Another is the right of U.S. citizen fathers to convey U.S. citizenship and to be the sole source of natural born Citizens. The U.S. constitution, by means of the natural born Citizen clause at Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, establishes and secures these three natural political rights.
On the other hand, the U.S. constitution does not secure the political rights of foreign fathers or foreign citizens. This is because such foreigners are not parties to the contract, called the U.S. constitution. Contracts secure the rights of parties to the contacts, but not the rights of non-parties. Thus, the U.S. constitution does not secure the natural right to run for President to an offspring of a foreign father because foreign fathers are not parties to the contract.
Because the U.S. constitution does not secure the citizenship rights of the offspring of foreign fathers, the constitution grants Congress with the power to secure citizenship rights to such people through naturalization. Such artificial man-made citizenship is based on the foreign offspring's place of birth on U.S. soil or on the U.S. nationality of the foreign offspring's mother. Such a child is born foreign by birth and is naturalized as a Citizens of the United States at birth.
So, given the logic of this social contract argument, how can anyone believe that the offspring of foreign fathers can be natural born Citizens who are eligible to be a U.S. President? The constitution owes the children of foreign fathers no such rights, and Congress may not grant them.
The rights to run for President and to be the source of U.S. Presidents are natural, as secured by the U.S. constitution. To equate foreign offspring with native offspring, which is to equate Citizens of the United States with natural born Citizens, is to overthrow the republican form of government and to force natural citizens into a religious non-republic that is unable to define citizenship rights naturally and objectively.