Thank you (regarding the Naturalization Act of 1790), that's very interesting to see. And, yes, it does say what you claim.
-----------------------------------------------
But apparently you are looking at the *wrong law*, because the Act you refer (The Act of 1790) was only in effect for a very short time and was was repealed and superseded by the Naturalization Act of 1795.
-----------------------------------------------
Apparently, some one gave you a bum steer ...because unless John McCain was born BEFORE 1-28-1795, there is no way in Hell that the 1790 law could apply to him. <GGG>
The United States Naturalization Act of January 29, 1795 (1 Stat. 414) repealed and replaced the Naturalization Act of 1790. The 1795 Act differed from the 1790 Act by increasing the period of required residence increased from two to five years in the United States, and introducing the Declaration of Intention requirement, or "first papers", which created a two-step naturalization process. The Act specified that naturalized citizenship was reserved only for "free white person[s]."
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
(The Act of 1790 was superseded by the Naturalization Act of 1795. So no need to hear any more about a long null and voided law... unless McCain is well more then 200 years old. :-)
---------------------------------------------
So... I suppose that exactly what language is in the 1795 Act would be of interest here... but *apparently* Congress at least believed that there was some legal question with regard to the Canal Zone, (at least that is Professor Chin's analysis), because they went and passed a law in 1937 that conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904.
At the time of Mr. McCain’s birth, (one year prior to the 1937 law) the relevant and prevailing law granted citizenship to any child born to an American parent “out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States.” according to Professor Chin, who noted that the term “limits and jurisdiction” left a crucial gap. The Canal Zone was beyond the limits of the United States but not beyond its jurisdiction, and thus the law did not apply to Mr. McCain.
Furthermore, the POWER of CONGRESS to DECIDE "whether and when children born to American citizens abroad are citizens or not" is not in any dispute, as it was CONFIRMED by the United States Supreme Court in Rogers v. Bellei in 1971, when the court affirmed that Congress had broad authority to decide the question.
So, as far as the highest court is concerned, the answers to these questions are in the laws passed by Congress.
So far I've come up with *two* laws that could be on-point:
1) the Naturalization Act of 1795.
and,
2) the 1937 law that *specifically addressed* the question of children born in the Canal Zone.
Message 24749738
But NOT the law that you cited, the 'Naturalization Act of 1790', which has been dead and buried a long, long time.... |
