Natural Born

Citizen
To Constitutional Standards

A Presidential Eligibility Requirement

In Article II Section 1 Clause 5
Of the United States Constitution

A Collection of Papers and Essays About

the “natural born Citizen” Term in Our U.S.
Constitution and Discussions Related Thereto

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired)

Blank Page
 Natural Born
Citizen
To Constitutional Standards

A Presidential Eligibility Qualification

Requirement in Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of
the United States Constitution

A Collection of Essays on Natural Born Citizen

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired)
For more writings by CDR Kerchner (Ret) see his blog and website:
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com and http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying, recording, scanning, posting on the internet, or by any information storage and retrieval system without the prior
expressed written permission from the author and copyright owner, except for the inclusion of brief quotations in a review.

Copyright © 2008-2023 Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. – All Right Reserved

 This book is dedicated to my wife Marjorie; my
children Charles and Debra; and my grandchildren;
Jacob, Ben, Kaitlyn, and Ashley. I pray that our
country in the future will be a place where one can
still fully enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness as envisioned by the Declaration of
Independence, and the contract put in place by our
country’s Founders and Framers to protect our
unalienable rights granted to us by our Creator and
to fulfill that vision, the U.S. Constitution.
 Table of Contents
Preface and Acknowledgements .................................................................................. v

The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen”
Term in Our United States Constitution ....................................................................... 1

Who is a ‘natural born Citizen’ of the United States to Constitutional

Standards? ........................................................................................................................... 7

The Three Legged Stool Test for Natural Born Citizen .......................................... 11

Reporters Need to Ask People Mentioned as Presidential and Vice-

Presidential Candidates the Correct Question ......................................................... 15

Constitution Day – September 17th: A Lesson from History. Is Being ‘Born a

Citizen (Citizen at/by Birth)’ of the United States of Sufficient Citizenship
Status to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of Our
Military? The Founders and Framers Emphatically Decided … It Was Not!..... 17

A Simple Euler Logic Diagram Shows Logical Relationship of Constitutional

Article II "natural born Citizen" to Other Kinds of "Citizens" of the United
States ................................................................................................................................... 23

Citizenship Status of All the Presidents of the USA ............................................... 25

Natural Born Citizen = 3 Leaf Clover Citizens < > 4 Leaf Type............................. 29

Citizenship Terms Used In the U.S. Constitution – A Table Displaying &

Discussing the Five Kinds of Citizens Mentioned in the U.S. Constitution...... 31

Kinds of Citizens Defined ............................................................................................... 33

Benjamin Franklin a Founder of Our Nation and Framer of the U.S.

Constitution in a 1775 Letter Thanks Charles Dumas of the Netherland of
Sending Him Three More Copies of the Newest Edition of Vattel’s “Law of
Nations or Principles of Natural Law”......................................................................... 35

Thomas Jefferson a Founder of Our Nation and Writer of the Declaration of

Independence Owned and Used a Personal Copy of the 1775 French Edition
of Vattel’s “Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”..................................... 39

George Washington in His First Months in Office as the First President and
Commander in Chief of the United States under the new United States
Constitution was Observed Reading and Studying Vattel’s Legal Treatise
“Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”......................................................... 43
 Preface and Acknowledgements

A Military Officer’s Oath to Support and Defend

the Constitution Does Not Expire or Retire
Why I stood up during my military retirement and committed to fighting to protect
the presidential constitutional eligibility term “natural born Citizen”.
Why I Fight!
by: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., (Ret)

Lead Plaintiff in the Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al Federal Lawsuit (2009)

Lead Plaintiff in the Kerchner et al v Obama of Pennsylvania State Lawsuit (2012)

The solemn oath of office I took upon becoming a Commissioned Officer in the United States
Naval Reserve:

I, Charles Frederick Kerchner, Jr., do solemnly swear that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or
domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this
obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that
I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about
to enter; so help me God.

My address and retirement remarks1 to the assembled unit and guests at my naval reserve
center when I retired from the U.S. Naval Reserves in 1995:

Captain Unruh, men and women of Combat Logistics Group Two Det 204, family
and friends -- I thank you for the kind words and honors bestowed upon me today.

I came to this organization 33 years ago as a young man. It was 1962, the height
of the Cold War, the year of the Cuban missile crisis. The closest we've ever
come to Global Nuclear War. The Soviet Empire was poised to roll over Europe
and maybe us too. I felt a calling, a sense of duty to serve my country. But as a
young man, I was also seeking excitement and adventure.

So I joined the Naval Reserve. Because I was only 17 years old, I had to obtain
my parent's permission to enlist. They gave it willingly and with pride, so I left
home and went off to serve my country.

1
CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. Retirement Ceremony 10 Sep 1995:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuTtclrNYek

v
 I did my duty. I also found some excitement and adventure. But, more
importantly, along the way, I found something else. I grew up as a result of the
experience. I became a man. I got an education in the school of the real world. I
saw how people live in other countries and learned to realize how fortunate we are
in this country. I found a sense of belonging and comradeship with my shipmates.
I learned leadership and honor. I gained wisdom. Via the GI Bill, the Navy even
paid for a large part of my college education. I truly would not be the person I am
today without the experiences I gained in the Navy.

The Cold War is over ... My calling to military service is over ... I have stood the
watch for 33 years ... It is now time for me to stand aside ... I now turn the watch
over to you, my shipmates, who like me have volunteered to serve and defend our
country.

I stand aside, but you carry on. And although we hope that the freedom from
external threats this country now enjoys will last forever, we learn from the past ...
that the bookmarks of world history are the names of its wars! So you, ... who
will now have the watch, ... must be vigilant ... and you must be prepared. Stand
the watch tirelessly. Stand it well. I wish you fair winds and following seas.

I stand relieved.

Thus on 30 Sep 1995, I ended my 33 years of combined active duty and reserve service with the
U.S. Naval Reserves. I left the guarding of the country and Constitution from threats to its
existence in the hands of the next generation and proceeded to move forward to the next phase of
my life. In my civilian work, I continued running my small manufacturing business founded in
1969 until I sold the business and fully retired in 2002. I was looking forward to enjoying the rest
of my life as a happily retired husband, father, and grandfather who had done his duty to serve
his country to the best of his ability.

Now let us fast forward in time to early January 2008. A man named Barack Hussein
Obama II appears on the political radar screen. He was highly promoted by the
mainstream media and press as a candidate for the President of the United States. As a
retired military officer, I knew if elected he would also become the Commander in Chief
of our military forces. So I began to ask myself who is this person Obama? I had not
heard much of anything about him before his running for the office of President.

I knew he was a new Senator from Illinois, but beyond that, I did not know much about
him. Always interested in current events and national politics, I decided to learn more
about Obama since the media was making an electoral messiah out of him. But the more
I tried to learn about him the more I found out that people didn’t know much about him
other than what his campaign aides were spouting and what he was spouting off his
teleprompter displayed canned speeches. The more I studied him the more I learned we
knew very little about him and that large parts of his early life were being deliberately
hidden and withheld from public scrutiny. That lack of detailed in-depth information
gave me great pause for concern. I followed his campaign and all the other candidates of
the major parties in the primary season.

vi
Everyone expected Hillary Clinton to easily beat this newcomer Barack Obama for the
Democratic Nomination. But surprise, surprise it increasingly became obvious that was
not a sure thing. Hillary's funding started drying up and Obama seemed to have unlimited
access to money. Along the way in the primary, rumors started surfacing about Obama’s
radical past and associations and foreign backing. I learned of Obama’s and his wife
Michelle’s connections to the domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, and Bill Ayer’s friend and
fellow member of the 60’s radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) organization
Michael Klonsky, and their respective spouses who also were key members of the SDS,
and other radical Communists, Marxists, Leninists, Maoists, Islamists, and Socialists
from Chicago IL.

I started hearing that Obama would not reveal any of his early life records such as birth
records, college, travel, and medical records, or the details of his adoption by his step-
father Lolo Soetoro and Obama’s life in Indonesia as an Indonesian citizen. Then all of a
sudden the online digital Certification of Live Birth (COLB) image was posted on the
Internet in June 2008 which was immediately declared by digital image experts to be a
forgery. Obama would not allow any controlling legal authority or forensic experts to see
the alleged paper document used to make the online image of the alleged document.
Reports surfaced saying his relatives and newspaper articles in Kenya were stating he
was born in Kenya, not Hawaii. I became even more concerned about who this Obama
guy was and what he was hiding.

I began to read the website World Net Daily since it was the only major online news site
that was actively investigating Obama and reporting investigative information and trying
to learn more about Obama and his hidden life records. I heard about a new book about
Barack Hussein Obama by Dr. Jerome Corsi, “The Obama Nation – Leftist Politics and
the Cult of Personality”. I bought it and read it. Another book I read was by David
Freddoso, “The Case Against Barack Obama – The Unlikely Rise and Unexplained
Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate”.

I became even more concerned that the American people were not getting the truth or the
facts about Barack Obama from the mainstream media. I was also concerned that our
progressive-movement-controlled Congress, in particular the U.S. Senate, was not
investigating the " natural born Citizenship" status of Obama in the same way they
investigated the natural born citizenship status of John McCain in April 2008. Obama
was being given a free pass on every hard question or charge about his early life and the
questions swirling around his true legal identity. Not only did the press give Obama a
pass, but the press went on the attack against anyone who was asking serious questions
about Obama and who wanted real investigations and/or answers and wanted the release
of numerous missing or sealed documents about Obama’s life narrative.

I learned how as a new U.S. Senator Obama had violated the Logan Act by interfering
with an election in a foreign country and by helping raise funds for the election in Kenya
for his cousin Odinga’s political party. That is a felony violation of a federal law named
the Logan Act. Again nothing was done or said about this by the progressive-movement-
lead Democratic Party in control of Congress or any controlling legal authority in the
USA. Everyone seemed afraid to confront Obama about his wrongdoings.

vii
I started blogging on the Internet and asking questions and posting my opinions about
Obama in late July 2008 under a pen name as is common on the Internet. The pen name I
used was Mountain Publius Goat or just Mountain Goat or Goat for short. I soon found
out that any criticism or hard questions asked about Obama on the Internet sites were not
welcome, quickly scrubbed or deleted, and that one ended up being banned from many
sites for persistently trying to get out information and facts not 100% favorable to Obama
or in any way critical of Obama.

There was a massive network of either paid or volunteer operatives manning the gun
ports of the Internet 24x7 to immediately counter-attack and overwhelm or push aside
with ridicule, personal attacks, blog scrolling, and other troll-type tactics targeting anyone
and everyone in response to any attempt to get some hard questions addressed about
Obama and Obama’s life narrative, a narrative that was not adding up factually as the
truth when one did some detailed research into it.

Sites like Wiki were heavily censored by Obama operatives and sympathizers. Yahoo
Ask and similar sites were being monitored by Obama operatives and sympathizers and
anyone posing questions challenging Obama's life narrative was reported to the
moderators by multiple Obama operatives for picayune technicalities and exaggerated
charges of violation of terms of service (TOS) and got the poster banned and the question
deleted. They knew extremely well how to use the Internet TOS system to keep critical
information about Obama off the Internet. I found out later that many of these operatives
were lawyers and paralegals directly or indirectly associated with groups connected to the
Obama campaign who knew how to write complaint emails and letters to the moderators
and/or owners of these websites to get posters challenging the Obama narrative removed
and banned. I also soon learned the so-called fact-checking sites online such as
FactCheck.org, Snopes.com, and PolitiFact.com for political issues were nothing more in
my opinion than propaganda organs for anything to do with Obama. The vast majority of
the usual online information sites were either willingly complicit in suppressing
information that was critical of Obama or they were easily intimidated by the Obama
operatives into suppressing those trying to get the truth out about Obama and asking for
formal investigations of Obama. As time went on, it became more and more obvious to
me that this was all being orchestrated from the top down by the Obama machine. I
believe that large amounts of money either directly, or indirectly money laundered
through one or two-step removed intermediate groups to hide the "original" source, or
with promises of future in-kind financial favors or political patronage jobs and favors, or
contracts for their business in the future were being expended to orchestrate the massive
control of information about Obama on the Internet. I believe a large amount of
volunteer labor was provided as needed by organizations such as ACORN and SEIU
which was then directed by the more sophisticated top-level operatives orchestrating the
Internet operation. The Obama machine virtually controlled the Internet and the major
sources of information on it like no other political campaign in history.

In August 2008 I learned that a lawyer named Philip Berg in Pennsylvania was
challenging the constitutional eligibility of Obama based on charges that Obama was
born in Kenya and not in the United States. Legal notice of the lawsuit was given to the
Democratic Party leadership before the national convention nominated Obama. Still, no
one in any controlling legal authority to properly vet Obama’s true legal identity called
for an investigation of Obama and the legal charges being leveled against him. I started
reading Attorney Berg’s blog.
viii
I also started making financial contributions to Attorney Berg’s effort and tried to help
him via back-channel communications of things I was reading and learning. Attorney
Berg's lawsuit was turned away at every level in the court system up to and including the
U.S. Supreme Court on the basis that he did not have standing or political question, and
that the question was not "ripe" yet since Obama had not won the election, and/or that it
was Congress' responsibility and not the courts to resolve this issue.

I soon gave up on Wiki and similar sites in my efforts to get some facts out about Obama
that I had learned. I next tried blogging on Greta Van Susteren’s “Greta Wire” forum.
My thought was that as a lawyer she would understand that at least an investigation
should be launched into the charges against Obama. While comments there were allowed,
the Obots (Obama Robotic Believers and Supporters – Paid or Volunteer) descended on
her forum like a plague of locusts. One could not make any argument for common sense
and try to get agreement that there should at least be an investigation of Obama without
being attacked with ridicule and name-calling personal attacks (the racist charge was their
favorite tactic) by teams of Obots. These Obots operated in various blogs and forums
using a tag-team approach like a professional wrestling match. And their arguments and
claims of objectiveness were just as fake. It was later learned that some of these Obots
were active members of the media and members of the secret back-channel planning
group for tactics to suppress the Patriots named "Journolist". It was allegedly disbanded.
But likely it was reconstituted with another name on another platform. If there is one
thing about Communists and far-left persons it is that they are highly organized and
persistent.

Around September 2008 another attorney named Leo Donofrio brought a lawsuit against
the Secretary of State of NJ charging that Obama and McCain were not natural born
Citizens of the United States and should not be allowed on the ballot in NJ. I started
reading his blog and trying to help him via back-channel communications. His case also
went up to the Supreme Court and was turned away for "legal technicality" reasons.

A similar case was filed by Cort Wrotnowski of CT against the Secretary of State of CT.
Leo Donofrio was assisting Mr. Wrotnowski with his case when it got to the Supreme
Court. Once again the Supreme Court turned a deaf ear. No case was ever heard on the
merits.

In late October and early November 2008 it became apparent to me that Google had
changed its search algorithms to bury or "sandbox" recent online articles critical of
Obama’s nativity story and constitutional ineligibility to be the President and were
pushing to the top of the search results counter stories from the Obama friendly "fact-
checking sites", blogs, and forums putting out favorable information about Obama and
attacking and ridiculing those challenging Obama's nativity story and eligibility issues.
This was also reported by other writers on the net trying to get critical facts out about
Obama. Suddenly instead of new news stories about the Obama constitutional eligibility
issue and questions about his birth location getting first page or two placements, they got
buried in the cellar of the net by the search engines.

ix
Wiki was dominated by far-left Obot operatives and the major search engines and other
high-tech social media sites such as Twitter were in the tank for Obama and engaged in
“shadow banning” and other information suppression techniques such as retro-actively
changing articles done by the AP for articles about Obama published in the past saying he
was Kenyan born, etc., and/or complete erasure of historical articles about Obama’s early
life statements. Obama was the far-left socialist's messiah and nothing was going to be
allowed to get traction on the Internet to upset their apple cart and plan to elect their
anointed one.

In California, an attorney named Orly Taitz brought a lawsuit against the Secretary of
State of California. I contributed information and advice to her back channel as well as
donating money to her to help fight the battle in CA. Her case too was turned away at all
levels of the federal court system, including ultimately in very early January 2009 at the
Supreme Court on technicalities such as standing, etc.

I wrote letters and sent suggested reading materials to all the Justices of the U.S. Supreme
Court suggesting they re-read the founding documents and asking them to stand up for
their oath and to take one of the cases being presented to them regarding Obama’s
constitutional eligibility.

No federal court had or would hear the case and charges against Obama on the merits.
They turned all of them away on technical issues such as standing and also made
statements that it was up to Congress. And Congress was saying it was a legal question
and up to the courts. It was a Catch-22 song-and-dance that “We the People” were getting
at every turn as we tried to get Obama properly vetted as to his true legal identity by
some controlling legal authority.

During the fall of 2008 and the rest of that year, I continued to read books about Obama
including the books he claimed he wrote, “Dreams from My Father” and “Audacity of
Hope”. I always had a pocket copy of the Declaration of Independence and U.S.
Constitution which I carried with me as I found it handy to have close during my many
years of community service to my local government. I decided to order a copy of other
key founding documents and reference books to read. I read the “Federalist Papers” and
Vattel’s “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”. I heard more about Obama
following the teachings and tactics of Saul Alinsky. I purchased and read Saul Alinsky's
“Rules for Radicals” and “Reveille for Radicals”. I read essays about the "Cloward-
Piven Strategy" of the far left with its long-term goal of collapsing our economic system
to force the installation of a national socialist new government to save us all from their
self-created manufactured final doomsday economic crisis. I recommended these
writings to others I was in contact with as they helped me understand the motivations,
intent, plot, and plan Obama had for our Republic if he won the election. And those
plans were not good, as we now clearly see. I had learned clearly that Obama was a hard-
core socialist and wanted to turn the USA into a socialist nation and destroy our
Constitutional Republic.

x
There were more books I obtained and read. Soon my den had a library shelf full of
books about Obama and his anti-American ideology, which was far left and hard-core
international socialist to the extreme. I learned about Obama being backed by George
Soros and a network of former SDS radicals who were now in the highest positions of
power in our academia, media, courts, finance, and government (elected and appointed)
and had positioned themselves therein to become “permanent influencers” of the
direction of our culture and access to information sources, as advocated by Progressive
Communists like the early 20th-century Italian communist, journalist, trained linguist,
and language manipulator, Antonio Gramsci, and the likes of mid-20th-century radical
Communist sympathizers like Saul Alinsky. Saul Alinsky told the 1960s college campus
“Students for a Democratic Society” (SDS) radicals, don't fight the battle in the streets
but fight it through a "long march" through the institutions of society over several
generations per the tactics suggested by Gramsci, undermining its culture since politics is
downstream of culture in a nation, and bringing it down from within.

I also began to suspect that Obama was being handled and groomed for his ascent to the
Presidency by foreign powers and funded with foreign money. Vast amounts of money
were pouring in from domestic and foreign sources "totally unaccounted for" as to the
ultimate source. I believe some of these sources of foreign money were from the Middle
East Islamic radical anti-American national government sources (open or hidden) and
also from the Chinese Communist Army Intelligence Service. I believe this money was
probably brought in via very large numbers of prepaid and untraceable “plastic money”
debit cards with substantial balances on each, possibly via diplomatic pouches brought in
via the Venezuelan government couriers and contacts of Bill Ayers or from the Chinese
communist government contacts of Michael Klonsky, maybe even via Cuban government
diplomatic pouches. These debit cards would then be used to make thousands upon
thousands of small donations to the Obama campaign over many weeks and months. I
believe that large numbers of ACORN volunteers or other leftist group volunteers
operating in “boiler rooms” were used to type in thousands and thousands of less than
$100 donations over many months using prepaid debit card after prepaid debit card. An
important fact we learned was that all the normal credit/debit card tracing and address
verification features used in most online donations were disabled for the Obama online
fundraising site. This was done on purpose to cover the real sources of much of the
money raised this way. Even Mickey Mouse and other false names and addresses simply
taken from telephone books without the real person's knowledge were used to make
donations to Obama's campaign. Still to this day the sources and methods of the
campaign contributions to Obama's 2008 election fundraising have not been properly and
fully forensically investigated by the Federal Election Commission.

The main blog where I wrote, and it was under my pen name of Mountain Publius Goat
from the end of October 2008 until January 2009, was called “Country First”. In their
online forum, in early November 2008, I launched “Goat’s Ledge". The URL was:
http://countryfirst.bravehost.com/phpBB3/ . That forum is no longer active but is
included here for historical purposes. In that dedicated forum, I wrote many essays,
articles, and information posts trying to provide a resource for people to learn what I had
learned and was continuing to learn about the great danger our nation was facing by the
election of Obama. A sample of some of the writings I posted in that blog are preserved
on my current website at this link:
http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/goatsledge/table.htm

xi
During the last part of 2008, I was also writing letters, sending faxes, and emailing my
Congressman, U.S. Senators, and other key elected officials in the U.S. Congress asking
them, demanding of them, that they investigate Obama and the charges being made
against him for election fraud and other nefarious activities. Amazingly, not a single one
of my elected members or the other key members of Congress that I contacted answered
any of my contacts to them. I began to believe the fix was in with Obama and that
nobody cared or was courageous enough to stand up to him and his legions of online
Obots and the enabling mainstream media.

Of course, the race card was being played against anyone who did challenge Obama, and
I believe the cowardly inaction of our Congress was in large part controlled by fear of
being charged with being racist for challenging Obama's lack of Article II Section 1
constitutional eligibility, i.e., Obama was not a natural born Citizen because his father
was not a Citizen of the United States when Obama was born. In fact, Obama's father
was not even an immigrant to the USA nor even a permanent resident of the USA.
Obama’s father was a foreign national sojourning in the USA going to college.

Obama’s father was a true Marxist ideologue and did not like the USA and immediately
upon completion of his studies in the USA returned to Kenya to help try and steer Kenya
into a Marxist form of government. Obama’s father was a British Subject from the
British Colony of Kenya when Obama was born. Thus under the British Nationality Act
of 1948 and recognized international law, Obama II/Jr. was also born a British Subject.
The usurper President Obama is still a British Protected Person or British Citizen to this
day. It became increasingly obvious to me that Obama’s loyalties from birth and
continuing to the present do not lie primarily with the USA. He considers himself a
Citizen of the World first and a U.S. Citizen second. He bowed overseas to foreign Kings
and Emperors. That is not the type of person we want in command of our U.S. military
forces.

Obama is exactly the type of individual (a person born with allegiance to a foreign
country) the founders and framers did not ever want to be allowed to become a future
President of the new nation they had spilled their blood to create. This is a national
security issue and that is why the founders and framers put the “natural born Citizen”
clause into Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of our Constitution.

In the latter part of 2008, I also tried to help with actions to get the Electoral College to
vet Obama’s constitutional eligibility. But I soon learned that the function, intent, and
purpose of the Electoral College to be a check and balance in our system of government
was broken. The founders and framers did not want a pure democracy. They chose the
Constitutional Republic form of government instead. There would be rules and eligibility
requirements for those who would serve in elected office. It would not simply be mob
rule and the populist vote that would determine who could or would be the President.

xii
The Electoral College was to be the first line of defense preventing a runaway popular
public vote from electing and allowing an ineligible, unqualified, unconstitutional person
to be seated in office as the President and Commander in Chief of our military. The
Electoral College was created because we are a nation of states united, i.e. The United
States and the states were to elect the President and Commander in Chief, not the direct
popular vote total. We were not to be a pure democracy. We were a Constitutional
Republic and our federal elections were to follow that Constitution. This was one of the
key purposes of the Electoral College as explained in the Federalist Papers.

But at this point in our history it has been completely compromised by state laws
instituted at the behest of the major political parties requiring the Electors to vote per the
popular vote outcome irrespective of their oath to support and defend the Constitution
and the Elector's original purpose to be a check against a runaway popular election
installing a constitutionally ineligible person as President. The Electoral College is now
nothing more than a rubber stamp of the popular election and it is completely controlled
by the major political parties. The original intent of the Electoral College has been
abrogated. The Electors now do what the political party bosses tell them to do, not what
their oath of office requires them to do. The Electors are no longer acting as protectors of
the Constitution but are puppets of the major political parties.

In December of 2008, after the Electoral College had failed to fulfill its constitutionally
designed duty to protect the Republic from the seating of an ineligible person in the
office of the President, I wrote letters with supporting information and data to President
Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
Michael Chertoff pointing out the constitutional eligibility of Obama was in doubt and
that they should have a special prosecutor appointed immediately to investigate Obama’s
true legal identity. I received no answers from any of them, not even a form letter. And
of course, they did not take any action to vet Obama's true legal identity.

It was now obvious to me that our last line of defense from the usurper Obama was the
Congress and the Joint Session of the newly elected Congress in early January 2009
wherein it was hoped we could get Obama’s constitutional eligibility challenged and
investigated before confirming him. I thus concentrated my efforts on sending out a new
round of letters, faxes, and emails to my elected officials and other key members of
Congress including Senator John McCain. Again I got no replies, no answers. Not even
a form letter. They completely ignored my numerous attempts to get them to investigate
Obama's true legal identity. I believed more and more the fix was in and that no one in
Washington DC cared at all about their oath of office and what the founders and framers
intended to prevent when they put the Natural Law legal term “natural born Citizen” into
Article II Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution, the presidential eligibility
clause, i.e., having a future President and Commander in Chief after the founding
generation was gone being elected and seated, who was a person born with allegiance to
another country.

xiii
They did not want in the future a dual Citizen or triple Citizen at birth, with the innate
foreign allegiance requirements of that status to other countries, to ever gain access to the
singular most powerful office in our new system of government. They wanted a person
born with “unity of citizenship” and “sole allegiance” at birth solely to the United States.
Even worse, given we had fought a revolution to gain our freedom from the British, the
founders would be rolling over in their graves having a person who was born a British
Subject, as is the case with Obama, being seated as the President of the United States and
Commander in Chief of our military.

I became more and more frustrated by the elected officials in Congress completely
ignoring me and 100s of thousands of other petitioners requesting that they investigate
Obama via Senate hearings just like the Senate held a "natural born Citizen" status
hearing on Senator John McCain in response to citizens on the left such as Professor
Jonathan Turley. We the People were the victims of unequal protection and lack of due
process under the law and the Constitution by a Congress vetting the citizenship status of
one candidate, McCain, but not two others, Obama and Calero, when asked to do so by
the citizenry. The controlling political party, the Democrat Party, was violating the
constitutional rights of the political minority, the very thing the Constitution and its legal
amendments were created to defend against. The rule of law and the Constitution were
being ignored by the new Congress as was done with the prior Congress, both controlled
by the Democratic Party which was firmly controlled by far-left anti-Constitution
progressives. I decided that the only solution left was to try and get someone to sue
Congress and Obama. I announced that opinion in my blogging at Country First in late
December 2008.

I started looking for someone to bring this type of suit, a lawsuit enjoining Congress itself
and the leaders of both chambers as defendants if Congress failed to properly vet
Obama’s constitutional eligibility at the Joint Session in early January 2009. So looking
around and seeing no one willing to tackle this approach after several days of pondering
and praying over the issue, I decided the person to bring this lawsuit has to be me. I was
being called to bring forth this lawsuit against Obama and Congress whether I liked it or
not, and my officer’s oath demanded I answer that call.

I started looking for an attorney to file a case to sue Congress in addition to Obama. I thought
that was the key -- to sue the Congress for their unconstitutional and illegal activities, and in case
the Congress didn't object to Obama's election and investigate (and of course, they didn't). I
wanted an attorney to be ready to sue in the time after the Joint Session of Congress would have
unconstitutionally confirmed Obama but before he was sworn in. The time when Obama was still
a civilian but was done with the political process and was now President-Elect. My thinking was
that such a case would be "ripe" for the federal courts to take up a case.
I had contacted several national constitutional attorneys whose names you would recognize. I
either received no answer or was told they said no. I had also contacted several political action-
type foundations such as The Heritage Foundation, American Conservative Union, and Judicial
Watch, and didn't get any responses. I had contacted all the other well-known attorneys who had
or were filing suits, and they were either too busy with their current legal suits or for whatever
reason, didn't want to take my suit. I also contacted local attorneys.

xiv
A key point in my search and interviews with attorneys was that I was looking for a pro bono
attorney because I wanted a dedicated Patriot to take this case, not a person just doing it for the
money. I was willing to pay for all the court costs and out-of-pocket expenses for the proposed
lawsuit.
By this time in my efforts, Congress had failed in its 20th Amendment duty in the Constitution to
make sure that the person elected was constitutionally qualified. The two political parties had
the fix-in for the Joint Session of Congress. It was fully orchestrated and conducted illegally in
parts in what was the shortest amount of time in recent history. The leaders speeded it along as
fast as possible taking unprecedented illegal shortcuts in the legally required order of the
proceedings listed in U.S. Code Title 3 Section 15 by not calling for the objections to "each and
every" state's Electoral College votes as submitted state by state in alphabetical order as is
required by law. They did this hurried proceeding to get the confirmation session over as soon as
possible to make sure that no U.S. House of Representatives member or U.S. Senator present
could seize the opportunity during any extended pauses in time during the normal process to
change their mind and object and challenge a state’s Electoral College votes. At least one state
had electoral votes including a dead person elected as an Elector, met for the Electoral College
and voted, and who then later died. The powers to be wanted to get this done as fast as possible
such that House member Representatives and/or Senators would not have a lot of time to change
their minds after the pre-session pressure put on them to not voice any objections to the
confirming of Obama. The fix was in. The Vice President of the U.S./President of the Senate
Dick Cheney and “jumping-jack” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi could not wait for the
moment to wrap that gavel down and end that session.
I had gone down my list and I was just about at the end of my rope in finding an attorney when
somebody said, "Did you see that Attorney Apuzzo is blogging on Orly Taitz’s site? Did you
ever try to contact him?" and I said, "No, I did see a couple of his comments, but I never saw any
way that I could contact him." The person offered to get me his address and phone number. I
then called Attorney Mario Apuzzo that same day and told him what I wanted to do, that I was
looking for a true Patriot to do it pro bono and file the suit before Obama was sworn in. I told
him that if need be and if we could not get any financial contributors to the battle, I would if
necessary cover all the out-of-pocket court costs and other such out-of-pocket expenses entailed
with bringing the case.
This discussion occurred in the late afternoon or early evening of Friday, January 16th, and the
inauguration was scheduled for noon, the next Tuesday, January 20, 2009. So there was a very
short amount of time left, and he said he'd have to think about it and discuss it with his family
because it was a very controversial and potentially dangerous thing to do, to bring a lawsuit like
this, given all the threats that were being thrown around on the Internet and elsewhere toward the
people who were standing up to ask these hard questions about Obama after he had won the
popular vote and was being treated almost messiah-like since he won the election. He wanted 24
hours to think about it.

xv
The next day I called him back, and he decided to take the case. At Attorney Apuzzo’s request, I
faxed him copies of all my letters to the various members of Congress and the Executive branch
and others as evidence of who I had contacted and to which I had not received any answer or
response (not even a standardized form letter or acknowledgment of my correspondence to them)
about investigating the constitutional eligibility of Obama. We worked together for the next
three days via telephone and email on putting the legal complaint together, and we filed it at 2:50
a.m. on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2009. I wanted the case filed before Obama was sworn in
so that I was suing the President-Elect, who was still a civilian and had not yet been vested with
the office, powers, and protection of the Presidency. My suit would be filed against President-
Elect Obama, who had been confirmed by Congress, and Congress itself, and several other
named defendants who were complicit in the unconstitutional and illegal acts in confirming
Obama. The political process was over at the point in time my suit was brought.
As I said, the lawsuit was filed at 2:50 a.m. (the very early morning) on 20 Jan 2009 before
Obama was planning to be illegally and unconstitutionally sworn in later that day. The case
proceeded through the federal court system in the able hands of Attorney Mario Apuzzo who in
my opinion became the leading expert in the United States on Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, the
Presidential Eligibility Clause, and the historical and Supreme Court history as to what that
clause means and why it was put into our Constitution. And that meaning is undoubtedly a
person born in the country to parents who are both Citizens of the country when the child was
born. That is the definition of natural born Citizen in the legal treatise used by the founders and
framers, “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” by Emer de Vattel, which was used
to justify the revolution and to draft the founding documents, and as was confirmed in the
precedence setting U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Minor v Happersett (1875) case.
Then the first of many mysterious and devious actions that have been observed in many cases
filed in the federal courts against Obama happened in our case. Filed electronically early in the
a.m. of Tuesday, 20 January 2009 as was mentioned earlier in this article, it was immediately
assigned a case number and a judge's name (which happened to be the head judge) in Newark
NJ, by the system assigned to hear the case. Attorney Apuzzo had the filing document, the
judge’s name, and the receipt for the filing fee provided to him electronically early that a.m. So,
all was good. We had filed while Obama was still a civilian and President-Elect. Then the funny
business started happening. Later in the day, Attorney Apuzzo called me and told me that he
surprisingly had received an electronic message from the clerk of the court stating that the case
had been assigned a new case number and filing time entered late in that same day, after Obama
was sworn in, and a new judge had been assigned to handle the case in a different city from
where he filed our case. It was transferred to Camden NJ. The head judge in Newark NJ did not
want this "hot potato" case. And he had it transferred to another judge in Camden NJ. I said to
Attorney Apuzzo I wonder what is up and why the head judge assigned this case to someone in
Camden NJ and not simply to another judge in Newark NJ. We also learned that the case number
assigned previously to the case was not simply voided but instead was reassigned to another case
thus making it appear in the system that it was originally never assigned to our case early that
morning many hours before Obama was sworn in.

xvi
I started thinking some “dirty tricks” were afoot and that maybe the head judge believed the one
in Camden NJ was "better suited" for some unknown reason to handle the case rather than
himself and instead of the usual randomly selected judge. And as I later learned more and more
as my case proceeded, my initial thoughts and feeling about the transfer of the case were correct.
The system was up to dirty tricks. Dirty tricks were indeed afoot and more were to come.
Attorney Apuzzo brought these suspicious activities to the attention of the judge in our
subsequent filings and even during a group meeting dinner event held by the Newark NJ judges
with the attorneys that practiced in that court. No answer was received other than a blank stare
from the head judge.
Restating, a "natural born Citizen" is a person who is born under natural law and the laws of
nature and the legal principle of having both “jus soli” and “jus sanguinis” citizenship at the time
of birth with sole allegiance to one country and only one country. That is what our founders
intended for the person who would be permitted to serve as the President and Commander in
Chief of our military after the founding generation was gone. Sole allegiance and unity of
Citizenship at birth to the United States and only the United States for the person who would
serve in this singularly most powerful and unique office in our new system of government was
the goal. They did not want persons with dual citizenship and dual allegiances via birth status
and the attendant foreign influences of such a status becoming future Presidents once the
founders and framers were gone. It was a national security issue. That is what our founders and
framers wanted for the office of the Presidency. And that is why they put the “natural born
Citizen” clause into the Constitution only in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.
For those who may wish to read the pleadings in Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al
lawsuit, you can read and get copies of the lawsuit and complaint and ultimate Petition to the
U.S. Supreme Court online at:

 Legal Complaint Table of Content: http://www.scribd.com/doc/19914488/

 Legal Complaint/Request for Emergency Injunction:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11317148/
 Legal Filings in Federal Courts:
http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/2344225
 Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court: http://www.scribd.com/doc/38506403/

In May of 2009, I launched a national full-page advertising campaign about the Obama
constitutional ineligibility issues in the print media focusing on the Washington Times National
Weekly edition which has a national readership and also which every member of the U.S.
Congress gets a courtesy copy each week on their desk. Copies of those ads can be seen at
http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/archives.htm . I conducted that two-plus year print
media ad campaign so the members of Congress and their staff who read that newspaper weekly
could never say they did not know about the issue because they don’t read the Internet, etc. I
also did it so Obama’s constitutional eligibility issues could not be easily scrubbed from history
as was being done routinely on the Internet in classic Orwellian “1984” down the “memory hole”
style.

I initially paid for all these print media ads myself. I also started writing and contributing articles
and essays to Attorney Apuzzo’s blog – http://puzo1.blogspot.com . Then in July 2009, I
launched the online website named “ProtectOurLiberty.org” to raise funds to continue the ads in
the print media and to further educate the people about the issues. That website can be viewed at:
http://www.protectourliberty.org .

xvii
Eventually I launched my own WordPress blog at http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com where I
continued the type of writing that I had done under my pen name of Mountain Publius Goat but
now wrote under my real name. I also did many radio and Internet news interviews with my
attorney. You can listen to them online via the links provided at this webpage:
http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/radio-tv-news-interviews.htm

I did everything I could to get the word out about Obama’s lack of constitutional eligibility
despite the mainstream media's propensity to ignore completely constitutionalists such as my
attorney and me until a lawsuit was lost. The media would then feature it that day in the news as
another failure of the merits of our charges against Obama, even though the courts never
addressed the merits in the case and only dismissed the cases on legal technicalities the courts
used to avoid the merits, such as denying plaintiffs’ standing.

In September 2010 my lawsuit reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The Petition for Writ of
Certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court on November 29, 2010. Once again the court
ducked the issue of addressing what is a natural born Citizen and whether Obama is one. As
Justice Thomas said in testimony one day on the hill in a Congressional sub-committee hearing,
"We’re evading that one". The Supreme Court evaded the most historic legal issue of the
century by not addressing the constitutional eligibility issue of Obama. It was a very necessary
first impression case. The court had the chance to directly adjudicate the “natural born Citizen”
clause in the U.S. Constitution as applied to who can be the President. For the first time in
history, such Article II cases were being presented to the highest court. Instead, the lower courts
and the highest court ducked the issue and bowed to the pressure of the political winds put out by
the mainstream media, the major political parties, and political leadership in Washington DC not
to do so. They had painted themselves in a corner on this issue with prior cases and thus they did
not what to do with my case except keep ducking the issue like everyone else in Washington DC
was doing. Two justices, Kagan and Sotomayor, purposely unethically voted during the
conference on the Kerchner et al v Obama et al petition to be sure to kill the case when they had
a clear-cut conflict of interest in voting on the petition. Obama had appointed them and their very
jobs and appointment would have been affected by a full Supreme Court hearing of the case. We
no longer have great justices on our Supreme Court to adjudicate constitutional issues. We no
longer have an ethical U.S. Supreme Court. Instead, we have Chief Justice John Roberts' led
"Neville Chamberlain" court which is nothing more than black-robed politicians with their
fingers in the wind to see which way it’s blowing and protecting their hides instead of the
Constitution to which they swore an oath.

From 14-16 December 2010 I attended the court martial of LTC Terry Lakin at Ft. Meade MD to
show my full support for a comrade in arms and fellow solemn believer in our Constitution who
was battling within the active duty military system to expose the hidden early life documents of
the usurper in the Oval Office. Here is an interview report on my observations and opinion of
what transpired at that court-martial: http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/12/28/cdr-charles-
kerchner-speaks-out-about-the-court-martial-of-lt-col-terry-lakin/

xviii
After almost 15 years in this fight and in my senior years, and as I move forth to publish this
book, people still ask me -- why did I do this -- why are you still fighting this battle – why don't
you give up? You can read some of the answers I gave Sharon Rondeau, Editor of The Post &
Email online newspaper years ago when she interviewed me for an article in her online
newspaper. You can read that interview at this link:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/06/21/a-one-on-one-personal-interview-with-commander-
kerchner-regarding-his-eligibility-challenge-and-lawsuit-against-obama-and-congress/ . Here is
my answer to those questions.

I believe in God, I believe in my country, I believe in my family, and I will fight to the death for
all three of those. I took my oath, and I believe those words, and I meant those words, "so help
me God." They are not just words to me. As I observed what happened in my country during the
2008 presidential election cycle, I feared the loss of my liberty and my unalienable rights
guaranteed under the Constitution for which our forefathers fought during the American
Revolution. These rights were codified into the fundamental law of the nation when they wrote
that contract for the protection of the sovereign and free people in the several states, the U.S.
Constitution. This contract limited the power of the new federal government and protected our
rights and liberty, my rights and liberties. I feared the loss of liberty if this usurper were allowed
to take office and continue to remain in office for any length of time. I did not trust Obama to
protect me. Obama was not loyal to the Constitution or our country. It was not the guiding light
to him to protect our liberty. But to him, the Constitution was an obstacle in the way of him
achieving even more power. If he and his progressive sycophants in Congress can ignore and
usurp one part of the Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, he will ignore and usurp other
parts, such as the Bill of Rights. That is why when I saw the other lawsuits failing and thought
about what else can be done, I felt I was being called forth to fight this battle and being told,
"You have to stand up, Commander Kerchner. You must live up to your oath to support and
defend the Constitution. You have to stand up and fight this battle. You must do this!"
I took a solemn oath to the Constitution of this country. We are a nation of immigrants but
Obama's father wasn't one. He was a foreign national. As a nation of immigrants, the glue and
sinew that holds this nation together are our nation's Constitution. Without it, we never would
have made it this far, and we won't make it much farther if it is ignored and trampled on. That
Constitution is the unifying force and the fundamental law of our nation and it is rooted in the
natural and universal law that unites us all. Our unalienable rights are granted by God and
Nature's Laws were created by God. That is what holds us together. If we lose it, the country is
doomed. We swear our oath to the Constitution and via it the ideas, rules, and laws enshrined in
it, not to a person. No man, not even a President is above the law and our Constitution. We are a
nation of laws, not men. We must protect the Constitution when it is attacked.
I had a lot of anxiety before I filed the lawsuit against Obama and Congress. But as soon as I
filed it, a certain peace came to me. I haven't lost a moment's sleep about it since then. As a
young man in the service I always suspected if the enemy came, it would be from manifestly
obvious foreign sources. But we are now faced with an enemy attacking the Constitution from
within. I answered the call when called. I did not turn away and say it was someone else’s job or
problem as our Congress and Courts have done when summoned to act by the cries of the
citizenry. I have engaged the domestic enemies of our Constitution. And I will continue to live
up to my oath as a Commissioned Officer to support and defend it.

xix
The truth will be revealed. The truth and the Constitution will win in the end. But many more
people need to stand up and fight against the destruction of our Constitution by its enemies. Will
you join me in this continuing battle now, and if need be continue this fight into the future? We
cannot give up on fighting to restore the enforcement of the original intent of Article II Section 1
Clause 5 of our U.S. Constitution, the presidential eligibility clause, a natural security clause,
which was put there by John Jay and George Washington at the Constitutional Convention in
1787 in Philadelphia PA to prevent anyone born with "foreign influence" on them via the
circumstances of their birth, i.e., born a dual Citizen or a triple Citizen at birth from gaining the
Presidency and Commander in Chief control of our military forces.
A Commissioned Officer’s oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies
foreign and domestic does not expire or retire. I will continue to fight this battle until the truth,
the Constitution, and the rule of law are upheld and the usurpers who were allowed to gain
access to the Oval Office and their "aiders and abettors" are brought to justice by a controlling
legal authority under the Constitution and punished by “We the People” who created it … so help
me God!
That is why I took on this fight many years ago. That is why I continue to fight. I hope that you
will enjoy and learn much more about the "natural born Citizen" term from reading this book and
the who, what, when, where, why, and how this natural security clause got inserted into our U.S.
Constitution and about the original intent, meaning, purpose, and understanding by the founders
and framers as to why they put the “natural born Citizen” term into the presidential eligibility
clause of Article II of our U.S. Constitution.

xx
 The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of
the “natural born Citizen” Term
In Our United States Constitution
WHITE PAPER
28 Feb 2016

Minor Edits: 12 Jun 2017

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired)

Who: The various sovereign, free, and independent several states, as a result of the revolution against
England had loosely banded together in a confederation to battle England and thus formed the new United
States in 1776. In 1787 they decided to convene a convention of the states to draw up a Constitution to form a
stronger, “more perfect” union and appointed delegates from their several states for that purpose. The delegates
met in the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, PA to write the new contract1 on behalf of We the People
represented by our several states. While there, the delegates considered, among many things, the eligibility
qualifications for who could be the President of the new stronger more perfectly unified United States under the
in-draft and newly proposed Constitution of the United States2.

Early on they considered requiring the President to be only a “Citizen”3. Being very concerned about foreign
intrigue and influence entering into the halls of power this was thought not to be a strong enough protection
against foreign influence4 on the person who would hold the singularly most powerful office under the proposed
1
A new more perfect union & contract, The U.S. Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
2
Timeline and various proposals and drafts of the U.S. Constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_drafting_and_ratification_of_the_United_States_Constitution

3
Madison’s ‘Constitutional Convention Notes’: https://archive.org/details/jamesmadisonsnot00scot

4
Federalist Papers – See and read the many papers about the concerns about ‘Foreign Influence’ on those who would govern under the
new U.S. Constitution, especially in the executive branch: http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/fed/blfedindex.htm

1
new Constitution. Then as is mentioned in Madison’s notes5 of the Constitutional Convention proceedings,
Alexander Hamilton at some point in time had proposed to the various delegates that for the office of President,
the person being simply and only a "Citizen" would be fine for the founding generation who were the "original
Citizens", and who had shed their blood in the cause of forming the new nation, but that in the future after the
new Constitution was adopted and once the founding generation was gone, the President would have to have a
stronger allegiance to the nation and be “born a Citizen”6, which today is more commonly called in U.S.
Statutory Laws a “Citizen at or by Birth”. Hamilton may have been concerned about those he possibly heard
talking about and/or insisting on an even stronger eligibility clause which might have precluded him from ever
becoming a President since we know that Hamilton7 was not born in the United States. But in the end, he need
not have worried about that since the grandfather clause covering the "original Citizens" would have exempted
him from the ultimate much more restrictive 'birth status' term put into the new Constitution.

As the end product in Article II Section 1 Clause 5, the presidential eligibility clause8 of our adopted and
ratified Constitution of the United States shows that the somewhat more restrictive term of simply being "born a
Citizen", rather than being simply any "Citizen", was NOT accepted either as being strong enough to block
foreign influence by birth on who would be a future President. And thus those who argue today that being "born
a Citizen" is all that is required as to citizenship status to be eligible to run for the office of President are wrong!
The founders and framers considered it and it did not make it into the final adopted Constitution or any of the
ratified subsequent first 10 Amendments9 put up to help get the new Constitution ratified by "the several" states.
History shows that simply being "born a Citizen" was proposed by Hamilton and it was not accepted. What can
be more demonstrative than that of "originalist" understanding and intent that simply being "born a Citizen" is
NOT eligibility enough to be the President?

What even more restrictive terms were looked at as to citizenship status did they choose and "Where" and
"Who" did the delegates get the suggestion from? We learn from history and the records in our Library of
Congress that in a letter10 dated 25 Jul 1787 from John Jay11 (who later became the first Chief Justice of the
U.S. Supreme Court under the new Constitution) sent to George Washington12, the presiding President of the
Constitutional Convention (and who had been the Commander in Chief of the Continental Army during the
Revolutionary War and who later became the first President of the United States under the new Constitution),
wherein John Jay suggested the much more restrictive term and “kind”13 of Citizenship which is obtained only

5
Madison’s notes compiled and edited by Max Farrand [1911] Vol.3: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/farrand-the-records-of-the-
federal-convention-of-1787-vol-3
6
Madison’s notes compiled and edited by Max Farrand [1911] Vol.3 - See pg 619: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/farrand-the-records-
of-the-federal-convention-of-1787-vol-3
7
Hamilton was not born in the USA – Born in the West Indies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hamilton
8
Presidential Eligibility Clause in U.S. Constitution - Article II Section 1 Clause 5: http://press-
pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_5.html
9
Constitution of the United States and First Twelve Amendments: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch1s9.html
10
John Jay's letter of 25 Jul 1787 to George Washington: https://www.scribd.com/doc/241491173/
11
John Jay was the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Jay
12
George Washington was the Commander in Chief of the Continental Army and was the first President of the United States under the
new constitution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington
13
The Five Kinds of Citizens Mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: https://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/Citizenship-Terms-Used-in-
the-U-S-Constitution-The-5-Terms-Defined-Some-Legal-Reference-to-Same

2
from Natural Law14 and the Laws of Nature and Nature's Creator and not from positive, man-made, resolutions,
statutory laws, treaties, or amendments, that is requiring the future Presidents to be a “natural born Citizen”15, a
person born in the country to parents (plural – father, and mother) who were both Citizens (born or naturalized
Citizens but both Citizens of some "kind") of the country when their child was born in the country. Born in the
country of a father who is a Citizen of the country and also whose mother is a Citizen of the country from the
Three Legged Stool Test16 for a "natural born Citizen". Without either leg, it cannot stand.

This Natural Law term provides for sole allegiance and unity of citizenship at birth to only one country. No
"dual-Citizenship at birth" person would be permitted to be a future President and Commander in Chief of our
military. Thus, the key "Who" were the essential and key people in getting the Natural Law "natural born
Citizen" term put into the adopted Constitution of the United States17 are John Jay and George Washington.
Knowing “Who” the key people were who put the "natural born Citizen" term into the new Constitution, and
their backgrounds and roles in the revolution and the formation and early governance of our new nation, will
help us much more clearly understand the reason "Why" that Natural Law strongly restrictive 'status at the birth
term' of "natural born Citizen" was selected, instead of the less restrictive "born a Citizen" or the even less
restrictive simply a "Citizen" terms. We will discuss this again later in the "Why" section of this paper.

What: The “What”, of course, is the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause
in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution8.

When: The summer of 17872,18 .

Where: The physical location “Where” they made the choices and decisions as to what went into our
Constitution and what did not was at Independence Hall during the Constitutional Convention held in
Philadelphia, PA.19

But “Where” intellectually did John Jay get the term “natural born Citizen” and his understanding of the strong
check on foreign influence and restrictive citizenship “kind” it was? He got it from Natural Law and the
enlightenment movement of Europe writing about the natural rights of man and about new forms of government
of which the founders and framers were readers, students, and followers and in particular the preeminent legal
treatise of the time on the principles of Natural Law, “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” by
Emer de Vattel (1758/1775). That legal treatise was widely read and put to use by the founders and framers in
justifying the revolution and writing the founding documents20.

14
Emer de Vattel’s “Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” [1758/1175/1797]: http://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-
of-nations/
15
Natural Law “natural born Citizen” definition per Emer de Vattel “Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” [1758/1775/1797]
- Vol.1 Chap.19 Section 212: http://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/
16
Three Legged Stool Test for Natural Born Citizenship: https://www.scribd.com/doc/185258103/Three-Legged-Stool-Test-for-
Natural-Born-Citizen-to-Constitutional-Standards
17
Constitution of the United States and First Twelve Amendments: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch1s9.html
18
Constitutional Convention of 1787: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Convention_%28United_States%29
19
Independence Hall: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Hall
20
Use of Vattel’s “Law on Nations or Principles of Natural Law” by ‘Founders and Framers’ such as Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson,
and George Washington to justify the revolution and write the Founding Documents: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-
franklin-in-1775-thanks.html

3
Why: When John Jay suggested via letter “to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners
into the administration of our national government” in his 25 July 1787 letter10 to George Washington, who
was presiding over the Constitutional Convention in the summer of 1787, John Jay was telling George
Washington, and by us reading that letter, telling all of us the “Why" he was suggesting to George Washington
that the presidential eligibility clause be made much more restrictive. He wrote suggesting that to help prevent
foreign influence on the future Presidents, who under the new Constitution would also be the Commander in
Chief of our military, the new Constitution should “provide a strong check” against foreign influence via birth
on the person who would be in command of our military. John Jay wrote “that the Command in chief of the
American armies shall not be given, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen”10. And since the
President was going to be the Commander in Chief of our military the President had to be a “natural born
Citizen”. It was a national security concern. That is “Why” the “natural born Citizen” term is in the presidential
eligibility clause. The term was selected for national security protection reasons to specifically keep persons
born with foreign citizenship and divided allegiances at birth, and/or aka dual-Citizens at birth, from ever
constitutionally being eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of our military. We must respect and
enforce the original understanding, meaning, and intent – the “Why”!

George Washington on 2 Sep 1787 replied21 by letter to John Jay appreciating his "hint". He passed along the
recommendation to the Committee of Eleven which was responsible for the actual writing and updating of the
various drafts to be considered. And thus in the next draft of our U.S. Constitution two days later we see the
"natural born Citizen" term in the presidential eligibility clause. Of course, they had to include a 'grandfather
clause' to exempt their current generation, the founding generation, since none of the "original Citizens' were
"natural born Citizens". The "natural born Citizens" are the children born in the country of "Citizens". Most of
the "original Citizens" were born British Subjects and were in effect self-naturalized into being "original
Citizens" by being the founding members of the newly created nation via the 1776 Declaration of Independence
and adhering to the Revolution. Historian David Ramsay of the founding generation wrote an excellent paper in
1789 on who were the "original Citizens"22

The “original Citizens’ and future “naturalized Citizens” and “U.S. Citizens” of whatever “kind” can and would
procreate the “natural born Citizens”, the children born in the country of Citizen parents14. A “natural born
Citizen” obtains their citizenship via Natural Law at birth with combined soil “jus soli” and both parents “jus
sanguinis” citizenship23. They need not point to any man-made law, constitutional amendment, or court ruling
to prove they are Citizens of the USA. They are born with sole allegiance at birth to the USA and only the USA.
They are by their very nature the largest group and "kind" of citizens of a nation. They are the three-leaf
clover24 of kinds of Citizens, the "natural born Citizens", not the four-leaf clover kinds. Dual-Citizens at birth
are the rare four-leaf clover kind. But under our Constitution that does not bring them good luck as to eligibility
to be President. The Constitution requires us to choose our President and Commander in Chief from the
21
Letter of reply to John Jay from George Washington thanking him for the hint to require "natural born Citizen" term in the
'Presidential Eligibility Clause' in our new constitution: On September 2, 1787, George Washington wrote a reply to John Jay in which
he said, "I thank you for the hints contained in your letter." And then two days later on September 4, 1787, the "natural born citizen"
clause for presidential eligibility appeared in the next draft of the U.S. Constitution reported out by the Committee of Eleven of the
convention delegates.
22
Paper by David Ramsay on the manner of acquiring citizenship in the new United States: https://www.scribd.com/doc/33807636/A-
Dissertation-on-Manner-of-Acquiring-Character-Privileges-of-Citizen-of-U-S-by-David-Ramsay-1789
23
Venn Diagram showing a “natural born Citizen” gains ‘Sole Allegiance’ and ‘Unity of Citizenship’ at birth via being born on the
soil of the USA and having both parents being Citizens of the USA when the child is born: https://www.scribd.com/doc/44814496/Of-
Trees-and-Plants-and-Basic-Logic-Citizen-at-Birth-NOT-Identical-to-Natural-Born-Citizen-by-CDR-Kerchner-Ret
24
Natural Born Citizens are The Three Leaf Clovers of Citizens – Not the Four Leaf Clovers:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/160107354/Natural-Born-Citizen-3-Not-4-Leaf-Clover-Type-of-Citizenship

4
plentiful and ordinary three-leaf clover variety of Citizens, not the more exotic or maybe more politically
attractive four-leaf clover kind. No dual-Citizen at birth or persons born with divided allegiances to two or more
countries can ever constitutionally be eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of our military. That is
what the founders and framers understood the Natural Law "natural born Citizen" term to mean and intended it
to mean. That is the "originalist" understanding and meaning and intent of the term.

This strongly restrictive birth status term is a national security clause and it must be protected. It applies only to
the office of the President and Commander in Chief, and per the last line of the 12th Amendment, it was made
applicable also to who can be the Vice-President9. We must protect this national security clause to prevent
foreign influence innately as to who can be the Commander in Chief of our vast military power.

Man’s nature and the Laws of Nature have not changed. It was a truism back then to block access to persons
born with foreign influence on them by birth from gaining access to the most powerful political office in our
nation and it is a much more important truism today. We must support and defend the Constitution of the
United States and in particular Article II Section 1 Clause 5 which is currently under repeated attack from
politicos pushing ineligible candidates of various political stripes to gain access to the Oval Office. No matter
how attractive a political candidate sounds or looks, we cannot allow them to violate the Constitution.

How: Via the letter written on 25 July 178710 by John Jay to George Washington, the presiding
President of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, PA, in the summer of 1787.

In conclusion, persons of true honor and respect for our Constitution would not even try to double-talk their
way into the Oval Office or VP slot by trying to convince the electorate that constitutionally a "Citizen" at birth
is logically, identically, and exactly the same as a "natural born Citizen" at birth25. Adjectives mean something!

As demonstrated above in this paper, the founders and framers told us those two citizenship terms are not the
same. How can we trust a person to uphold any other part of the Constitution if they violate Article II of it by
their very running as a constitutionally ineligible candidate? Marco Rubio was a dual-Citizen at birth – Cuban
via his foreign national Cuban parents and U.S. by place of birth. Marco Rubio26 is not constitutionally eligible
to be President or Vice-President. Ted Cruz was a tri-Citizen at birth – Cuban via his foreign national Cuban
father, U.S. via his mother, and Canadian via his place of birth. Ted Cruz27 is not constitutionally eligible to be
President or Vice-President.

You may say, well a Canadian Citizen at birth or a Cuban Citizen at birth, well that's not so bad. They sound
like good people. They make promises that sound good for the country. They say they are going to restore the
Constitution. Well, good and honorable people don't violate the U.S. Constitution to try and save it. If we keep
allowing the political establishment and major media and cowardly Congress and Judiciary to keep moving the
true understanding and meaning of "natural born Citizen" further away from originalist understanding, meaning,
and intent, where will it stop? The next time it could be a child born in Saudi Arabia to a U.S. Citizen mother
and an Iranian Citizen and National father.
25
Euler Logic Diagram showing the logical relationship between the different ‘kinds’ of U.S. Citizens:
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2016/02/14/euler-logic-diagram-shows-logical-relationship-of-constitutional-article-ii-natural-
born-citizens-to-other-type-citizens-of-the-united-states/
26
Marco Rubio Missing Two Legs! He Cannot Constitutionally Stand for President and Commander in Chief, or VP:
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2016/02/13/marco-rubio-is-missing-two-legs-he-cannot-constitutionally-stand-for-pres-or-vp-he-
fails-three-legged-stool-test-for-natural-born-citizen/
27
Ted Cruz is Missing Two Legs! He Cannot Constitutionally Stand for President and Commander in Chief, or VP:
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2016/01/13/ted-cruz-is-missing-two-legs-the-three-legged-stool-test-for-natural-born-citizen/

5
Look at what has happened to our country and the rule of law under the current ineligible defacto President. We
cannot allow a future repeat of what we have experienced with the current defacto unconstitutional President.
The constitutionally ineligible defacto President Obama was born with dual citizenship and allegiance (British
and U.S.) and with that, he brought his questionable loyalties and his "Dreams from His Father" to
fundamentally transform America, a father who was never a U.S. Citizen and was never even an immigrant to
this country. We are a nation of immigrants but Obama's father was not one. But with his promises of hope and
change the people ignored the Constitution and elected him anyway. And our hamstrung political party-
controlled Electoral College28 and cowardly Congress confirmed the election. And then of course finally our
cowardly Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts swore him in. Obama is exactly the example and reason
why we cannot allow a dual-citizen at birth, a tri-citizen at birth, or a citizen of the world to gain access and
control of the Oval Office ever again. We cannot trust promises that sound good. This is not about politics. It is
about the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We cannot allow precedence to be set by electing and swearing into office another constitutionally ineligible
person for President and Commander in Chief, or Vice-President, no matter how politically attractive to you
they are. We must take a stand on this. Do not support any constitutionally ineligible candidates. We must
support and defend Article II of the U.S. Constitution or very soon we won’t have a Constitution, a
Constitutional Republic, or a nation governed by the Rule of Law at all.

To contact the author and/or to read more of the author's writings about the constitutional term "natural born
Citizen" see the links below:

CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired)

Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
https://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty
https://www.scribd.com/doc/48856102/All-U-S-Presidents-Eligibility-Grandfather-Clause-Natural-Born-
Citizen-Clause-or-Seated-by-Fraud

28
Some comments about the true purpose of the Electoral College. Unfortunately, the major political parties over the years have put
into place in many states statutory laws mandating how the Electors from that state must vote (per said laws) which end up trumping
their Oath to the Constitution to support and defend the Constitution. The political parties consider the Oath of Office taken by the
Electors as nothing but a ritual and the Electors are told to obey the state laws controlling how they must vote … or else! They are no
longer being allowed to carry out their constitutional oath and duties as originally intended per the Constitution as described in the
Federalist Papers, and are under threat of individual and personal legal penalties, and/or removal from office if they try to act on
behalf of defending the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. If the Electoral College was allowed to act as originally intended
as a stop-check against constitutional mistakes made by the political parties to mislead people in the popular vote by voting for and
selecting someone who is NOT constitutionally eligible, the Electors would stop things right then and there in that constitutional body
and process when it convened, ensuring that only a constitutionally eligible candidate is "elected" by the Electors and forwarded to the
Congress for its confirmation action, and if necessary demand and call for a new election to provide to the College for consideration
only a constitutionally eligible candidate(s), to allow the people and political parties to right their constitutional wrong. But the
Electoral College today is now totally ineffective and hamstrung by the political parties and laws they have gotten put in place in 27
states and is now nothing more than a rubber stamp of the election results and candidates, no matter how constitutionally flawed those
politically-party-endorsed candidates and election results may be. We are being governed by the Political Parties, not the U.S.
Constitution in this and many other areas. See these articles about the Electoral College for more information:
http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/goatsledge/20081108%20Electoral%20College.pdf and
http://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.html

6
 Who is a ‘natural born Citizen’ of the United States to
Constitutional Standards?
CDR Charles Kerchner (Retired)
Written: 17 Dec 2014

Regarding the legal term “natural born Citizen”1 in our U.S. Constitution2 and basic logic
think of this for a few seconds -- Trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born
Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at
birth)” are “natural born Citizens”3,4

We know from the history, source, and facts of the selection of the presidential eligibility clause
that being only "born a Citizen" was considered and not accepted. Instead, the founders and
framers chose the much more restrictive term "natural born Citizen"5 The word natural in
that constitutional term refers to its Natural Law source. We learn this from the original
sources plus modern sources such as the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus6,7

Regarding Barack Obama, we know he is NOT a "natural born Citizen" no matter where he
was born since his father was a foreign national, not even an immigrant to the USA. All prior
elected Presidents after the founding generation passed were natural born Citizens.8

1
Presidential Eligibility Clause in U.S. Constitution - Article II Section 1 Clause 5: http://press-
pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_5.html
2
Constitution of the United States and First Twelve Amendments: http://press-
pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch1s9.html
3
Of Tree and Plants and Basic Logic: https://www.scribd.com/doc/44814496/Of-Trees-and-Plants-and-Basic-Logic-
Citizen-at-Birth-NOT-Identical-to-Natural-Born-Citizen-by-CDR-Kerchner-Ret
4
Three Legged Stool Test for Natural Born Citizen: https://www.scribd.com/doc/185258103/Three-Legged-Stool-Test-
for-Natural-Born-Citizen-to-Constitutional-Standards
5
Article II Super PAC website: https://www.scribd.com/document/161994312/Article-II-Presidential-Eligibility-Facts
6
YouTube video about natural born Citizen by constitutional scholar & professor Atty Herb Titus – Part I:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8
7
YouTube video about natural born Citizen by constitutional scholar & professor Atty Herb Titus – Part II:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ
8
The Constitutional Eligibility of All U.S. Presidents to Date: https://www.scribd.com/doc/48856102/All-U-S-
Presidents-Eligibility-Grandfather-Clause-Natural-Born-Citizen-Clause-or-Seated-by-Fraud

7
Barack Obama was born with dual citizenship, British via his father and basic statutory U.S.
citizenship at best, and possibly only British Citizenship, depending on where exactly he was
born9 and the age of his mother when he was born.

Obama is NOT a ‘natural born Citizen’ of the United States to constitutional standards. A
natural born Citizen of the USA is a person born in the USA to parents who are both Citizens
of the USA (born or naturalized) when the child was born and thus the person was born with
unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the USA’10. Ted Cruz11 (born a citizen of Cuba,
Canada, and the USA), Marco Rubio12 (born a citizen of Cuba and the USA), and Bobby
Jindal13 (born a citizen of India and the USA) are also NOT natural born Citizens of the United
States since they were all born with dual or multiple citizenships and did not have sole
allegiance at birth to the USA. They were born with foreign allegiances and thus potential
foreign influences on them.

That is exactly what the founders and framers did NOT wish to have to occur with future
Commanders in Chief of our military forces once they, the founding generation, were gone.
That was specifically the understanding and intent of the founders and framers in inserting the
term 'natural born Citizen' into the presidential eligibility clause as to who could be President
and Commander in Chief of our military once the founding generation had passed.

The founding generations had a grandfather clause in the presidential eligibility clause
exempting them.

People need to read Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of the Constitution14 to understand that
grandfather clause, and understand the stricter requirements placed on future generations, and
not be fooled by talking heads and political party leadership putting out misinformation and
half-truths. No such exemption exists from the natural born Citizen requirement for
generations after the founders had passed.

9
Statements from various sources saying that Obama was born in Kenya and not Hawaii:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/36604073/Kenyan-Ministers-Orengo-Khalwale-Obama-born-in-Kenya-not-native-
American-should-repatriate
10
Unity of Citizenship and Sole Allegiance at Birth legal essay by Attorney Mario Apuzzo:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/04/article-ii-natural-born-citizen-means.html or http://www.scribd.com/doc/48756724/
11
Confirmed: Senator Ted Cruz Releases Canadian Birth Certificate – Was a Tri-Citizen at Birth – Did Not Have Sole
Allegiance to the USA at Birth – Constitutionally Not Eligible to be U.S. President or Commander in Chief of Our
Military: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/08/19/confirmed-sen-ted-cruz-releases-canadian-birth-certificate-was-
a-dual-citizen-at-birth-not-eligible-to-be-u-s-president/
12
Rubio not constitutionally eligible – Senator Marco Rubio’s father was not a naturalized citizen when Marco was born
in May 1971 per National Archives data. His father applied for naturalization in Sep 1975. Marco Rubio not
constitutionally eligible to run for President or VP: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2011/05/22/senator-marco-rubios-
father-was-not-a-naturalized-citizen-when-marco-was-born-in-may-1971-per-national-archives-data-his-father-applied-
for-naturalization-in-sep-1975/
13
Jindal not constitutionally eligible - Gov Bobby Jindal was born a Citizen of India. He was a Native-Born U.S. Citizen,
yes, but Gov Bobby Jindal is NOT a Natural-Born Citizen. He is not constitutionally eligible to be President or Vice
President: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2011/05/22/native-born-citizen-yes-but-gov-bobby-jindal-is-not-a-natural-
born-citizen/
14
Presidential Eligibility Clause in U.S. Constitution - Article II Section 1 Clause 5: http://press-
pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_5.html

8
The founding generation had shed their blood to achieve that Constitution. The founders and
framers did not wish some future generation to allow a person to become the President and
Commander in Chief of our military forces who had foreign influence at birth due to possible
secret access to foreign money, political charm, and/or political party desire and expediency to
just put up anyone they desired. The Constitution was to limit eligibility as to who can be
President. It was a restrictive clause, not an inclusive clause.

John Jay, a scholar of natural law15, who became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme
Court, is the source of this restrictive clause. As John Jay conveyed to George Washington16 in
his letter of 178717, it would be a “strong check” on allowing anyone born with “foreign
influence” on them from gaining command of our military.

Barack Obama is exactly the example of an individual whose loyalty to the U.S. Constitution is
in question. The founders and framers were very wise in the choice of words they used in the
Constitution.

Unfortunately, the Progressive/Socialist leaning mainstream and major media and leadership
of both political parties have actively engaged in misinforming the American electorate and
diluting the "original intent" meaning and understanding of the presidential eligibility clause.
And the USA and We the People are paying the price for this every single day.

Hopefully, the new Congress will do something such as a call for public congressional hearings
into the falsified life narrative18 of Barack Obama and in the process re-discover the true
understanding and intent of the founders and framers' use of the constitutional term "natural
born Citizen of the United States”.

I pray they do before it is too late for what is left of our Constitutional Republic.

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)

ProtectOurLiberty.org

15
'The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law' as U.S. Federal Common Law Not English Common Law Define
What an Article II Natural Born Citizen Is by Mario Apuzzo, Esq.: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/08/law-of-nations-
and-not-english-common.html
16
Constitution Day – September 17th: A Lesson from History: https://www.scribd.com/doc/278228840/A-Lesson-from-
History-Is-Simply-Being-Born-a-Citizen-Citizenship-Enough-to-be-President-The-Founders-and-Framers-Emphatically-
Decided-It-Was-Not
17
John Jay's letter of 25 Jul 1787 to George Washington: https://www.scribd.com/doc/241491173/
18
Hawaii Senior Election Clerk-Obama Was NOT Born in Hawaii-Washington Times National Weekly-5 Jul 2010, Page
five: https://www.scribd.com/doc/33937307/Hawaii-Sr-Election-Clerk-Obama-Was-NOT-Born-in-Hawaii-Wash-Times-
Natl-Wkly-20100705-Pg-5

9
10
 The Three Legged Stool Test & Analogy for Natural born
Citizenship of the United States to Constitutional Standards
November 15, 2013

Filed under: Articles/Reports-CFK1 — cfkerchner @ 10:25 p.m.

Tags: Article II Section 1 Clause 5, Barack Obama not a natural born Citizen of U.S., the child must be born
in USA, constitutional standards, the father must be U.S. Citizen, the mother must be U.S. Citizen, natural
born citizen, presidential eligibility clause, three legged stool, U.S. Constitution

Updates: WWW Links URLs Last Updated 23 March 2017

The Three Legged Stool Test & Analogy for Natural born
Citizenship of the United States to Constitutional Standards1 | by
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret), ProtectOurLiberty.org

See ProtectOurLiberty.org for more information about the legal term of art natural born Citizen of the U.S.

A “natural born Citizen” of the United States is a child born with Sole Allegiance and Unity of
Citizenship at Birth2 to one country and only one country -- the USA, i.e., a child born in the USA of
two (2) U.S. Citizens. The parents can be Citizens by Birth or they can be Citizens by Naturalization
after immigrating to the USA.

However, to create a “natural born Citizen” of the United States by the Law of Nature and Natural
Law both parents must be Citizens at the time the child is born in the USA.

1
CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s Blog: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
2
Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Legal Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/04/article-ii-natural-born-citizen-means.html

11
See this legal reference book used by the Founders and Framers3 of our U.S. Constitution: The Law of
Nations or Principles of Natural Law, Vol.1 Chapter 19 Section 212, Emer de Vattel, 1758-17974.

While exact statistics are not available, I estimate that the overwhelming majority (probably 75% +) of
citizens in the United States are natural born Citizens. This clause was added for future presidents as a
national security clause. It is from the group of natural born Citizens that our founders prescribed in
the presidential eligibility clause in Clause 5, Section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution that we
shall choose a President and Commander in Chief of our military as a strong check against foreign
influence5 via birth allegiances on the person in that singular and most powerful office. One needs all
three citizenship legs to be a natural born Citizen and have sole allegiance and claim on you at birth to
one and only one country — the United States: 1. Born in the USA. 2. Father must be a U.S. Citizen
(born or naturalized). 3. Mother must be U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized).

Like a three legged stool if you take away any of the three citizenship legs1 of the Article II
constitutional intent and requirement to being a "natural born Citizen", i.e., being born with unity of
citizenship in and sole allegiance2 to the USA, the child is born with more than one country's
citizenship and claim of allegiance/citizenship on them at their birth and thus they are NOT a natural
born Citizen of the United States. And as in the analogy of a stool designed to stand on three legs and
it is missing a leg, it falls, likewise the person's claim to natural born Citizenship fails if the person
does not have all three citizenship legs required to be a natural born Citizen at the time of their birth.

See the following page for a Venn diagram that logically and graphically shows how a natural born
Citizen has the intersection and unity of all three Citizenship statuses at birth. Read this essay " Of
Trees and Plants”6 on basic logic which explains that being simply a “Citizen at Birth (CAB)” does not
necessarily make oneself a “natural born Citizen (NBC)” at Birth. Natural born Citizens are
overwhelmingly the largest subset of all American citizens. The location of birth being in the U.S. to a
U.S. father and U.S. mother … all being U.S. Citizens at the time of birth is the only way one achieves
"natural born Citizen" status. Natural born Citizenship is gained by the laws of nature, not by any
man-made law or statute or even a constitutional amendment granting that status. Natural born
Citizens need no act of man for their Citizenship was created by nature and nature's Creator. Natural
born Citizens of the United States have sole allegiance to one and only one country at birth … the
United States. No foreign power or country can claim their allegiance under U.S. law or the Law of
Nations.

Over 75% of American citizens fit that requirement, i.e., born in the USA of two U.S. Citizen (born or
naturalized) parents. Natural born citizens are the 3 Leaf Clovers of the American citizens, not the 4
Leaf Clovers7. It is from that 75% of American citizens that our founders and framers directed us via
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution that we shall choose our President and Commander-in-
Chief, not a dual-citizen son of a foreign national and British Subject father who was never even an
immigrant to this country, and said child being born a British subject himself via his foreign national
father, as is the case with Obama’s birth status.

3
Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Legal Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-franklin-in-1775-thanks.html
4
Emer de Vattel’s “Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” [1758/1175/1797]: http://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-
law-of-nations/
5
John Jay's letter of 25 Jul 1787 to George Washington: https://www.scribd.com/doc/241491173/
6
Of Tree and Plants and Basic Logic: https://www.scribd.com/doc/44814496/Of-Trees-and-Plants-and-Basic-Logic-Citizen-at-
Birth-NOT-Identical-to-Natural-Born-Citizen-by-CDR-Kerchner-Ret
7
Natural Born Citizens are The Three Leaf Clovers of Citizens – Not the Four Leaf Clovers:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/160107354/Natural-Born-Citizen-3-Not-4-Leaf-Clover-Type-of-Citizenship

12
 See ProtectOurLiberty.org for more information on the constitutional legal term “natural born Citizen”

More historical and legal papers and analyses on the true constitutional meaning and intent of the
founders and framers of the presidential eligibility clause, natural born Citizen, in our U.S.
Constitution can be found at this link: http://www.scribd.com/collections/3301209/

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)

Lehigh Valley PA USA

http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/

P.S. Also see these essays and videos regarding the legal term of art "natural born Citizen" and basic
logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of "born
Citizens (citizens at birth)" but not all "born Citizens (citizens at birth)" are "natural born Citizens"8,
Article II Presidential Eligibility Facts9, and this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr.
Herb Titus: http://www.kerchner.com/videos/NBC-parts-1&2-by-Dr-Herb-Titus.mp4

8
Of Natural Born Citizens and Citizens at Birth and Basic Logic: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-
citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-
birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/
9
Article II Presidential Eligibility Facts: https://www.scribd.com/document/161994312/

13
14
 Reporters Need to Ask People Mentioned
as Presidential and Vice-Presidential
Candidates the Correct Question
By: CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)

Written: 28 May 2015 – WWW Link URL Update: 23 Mar 2017

The correct question is not are you a “Citizen” 1,7,8 of the United States, but
instead per the ‘Presidential Eligibility Clause’ 2 in Article II Section 1 Clause
5 of our U.S. Constitution3, are you a “natural born Citizen” 1,4,8 of the United
States.

One cannot ignore a word or term in our U.S. Constitution!

Every word in it was chosen carefully and put there for a reason.

As U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote in Holmes v.

Jennison, 39 U.S. 540 (1840):

“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. The
many discussions which have taken place upon the construction of the
constitution, have proved the correctness of this proposition; and shown the
high talent, the caution, and the foresight of the illustrious men who framed it.
Every word appears to have been weighed with the utmost deliberation, and its
force and effect to have been fully understood.”

Since, as Chief Justice Taney explained, every word in the U.S. Constitution is there for a
specific reason, reporters should not be omitting words when asking presidential and/or
vice-presidential candidates about their citizenship status.

1
Citizenship Terms in U.S. Constitution: https://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/Citizenship-Terms-
Used-in-the-U-S-Constitution-The-5-Terms-Defined-Some-Legal-Reference-to-Same
2
Presidential Eligibility Clause in U.S. Constitution - Article II Section 1 Clause 5: http://press-
pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_5.html
3
Constitution of the United States: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
4
The Three Legged Stool Test for Natural Born Citizen: https://www.scribd.com/doc/185258103/Three-
Legged-Stool-Test-for-Natural-Born-Citizen-to-Constitutional-Standards

15
Thus the media and reporters should not be asking if the candidates or prospective
candidates are simply a "Citizen". Instead, they should be asking if they are a "natural
born Citizen" — to constitutional standards as intended and understood by the founders
and framers5.

The adjective “natural” before the words “born Citizen” means something very specific.
It means created by nature or natural law, not by positive, man-made laws such as Title 8
Section 14016, amendments, or treaties. Man-made laws cannot create a “natural born
Citizen“. Only the laws of nature and the facts at the time of the person's birth can create
a "natural born Citizen".7

“Natural” in the “natural born Citizen” term points to the Laws of Nature and Natural
Law and whether both your parents were U.S. Citizens when you were born. It takes two
U.S. citizens to procreate a natural born Citizen when that child is born in this country. A
“natural born Citizen” is a person born in the country to parents who are both Citizens of
the country.8 See the “Three Legged Stool Test for Natural Born Citizen” for more
information.4

5
U. S. Constitution Article II Presidential Eligibility Facts:
https://www.scribd.com/document/161994312/Article-II-Presidential-Eligibility-Facts
6
USC Title 8 Section 1401: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401
7
Of Trees and Plants and Basic Logic and Natural Born Citizen Term:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/44814496/Of-Trees-and-Plants-and-Basic-Logic-Citizen-at-Birth-NOT-
Identical-to-Natural-Born-Citizen-by-CDR-Kerchner-Ret
8
Emer de Vattel’s “Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” [1758/1175/1797]:
http://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/

16
Constitution Day - 17 Sep 2016: A Lesson from
History. Is Being Born a Citizen (Citizen at/by Birth)1
of the United States of Sufficient Citizenship Status to
be President of the United States and Commander in
Chief of Our Military? The Founders and Framers
Emphatically Decided ... No, It Was Not!2

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., P.E. (Retired)

17 September 2016 - Constitution Day

During the process of developing a new U.S. Constitution, Alexander Hamilton submitted a
suggested draft for the Constitution on June 18, 1787. At some point, he also suggested to
the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary
Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.
Another version of Hamilton's proposed Constitution and which principles were stated
during the convention's deliberations per Madison's notes and journal (see work of
Farrand - pg 619)3, was given to Madison near the close of the convention for inclusion in

1
Of Natural Born Citizens and Basic Logic; https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-
and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-
citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/
2
Article II Presidential Eligibility Facts: https://www.scribd.com/document/161994312/Article-II-Presidential-
Eligibility-Facts
3
Madison’s ‘Constitutional Convention Notes’: https://archive.org/details/jamesmadisonsnot00scot
17
Madison's record of events for the convention. Hamilton's proposed Constitution was not
accepted.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

"No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now
a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States."

Many of the founders and framers rightly had a fear of foreign influence4 on the person
who would in the future be President of the United States since this particular office was
singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. The President was
also to be the Commander in Chief of the military. This fear of foreign influence on a
future President and Commander in Chief was particularly strongly felt by John Jay5, who
later became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He felt so strongly about the
issue of potential foreign influence that he took it upon himself to draft a letter to General
George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention,
recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements.
John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel's
treatise on Natural Law and the Law of Nations6. In his letter to Washington, he said that
the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a
"strong check" against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the
command of the military be open only to a "natural born Citizen". Thus Jay did not agree
that simply being a "born Citizen" or "born a Citizen" was sufficient enough protection
from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government.
He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., 'natural'. And that word
natural goes to the Citizenship status of one's parents, both of them when their child is
born, as per natural law.

Below is the relevant proposed change language from Jay's letter which he proposed to
strengthen the citizenship requirements in Article II and to require more than just being a
"born Citizen" of the United States to serve as a future Commander in Chief and
President.

John Jay wrote in a letter to George Washington dated 25 Jul 1787:

"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to
the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to
declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to
nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen. "

See a transcription of Jay's letter to Washington at this link7. This letter from Jay was
written on July 25, 1787. General Washington passed on the recommendation from Jay to
the convention and it was adopted in the final draft and was accepted adding the adjective
"natural" making it "natural born Citizen of the United States" for future Presidents and
Commanders in Chief of the military, rather than Hamilton's proposed "born a Citizen".

4
The Federalist Papers: https://thefederalistpapers.org/federalist-papers
5
John Jay's letter of 25 Jul 1787 to George Washington: https://www.scribd.com/doc/241491173/
6
Constitutional Scholar; Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/08/law-of-
nations-and-not-english-common.html
7
Image of John Jay’s July 1787 letter to the President of the Constitutional Convention, George
Washington: http://www.kerchner.com/images/protectourliberty/johnjay1787lettertogeorgewashington.jpg
18
Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our
nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 Sep 1787:

"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."

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton's proposed principles for a Constitution and a presidential citizenship eligibility

requirement therein required that a Citizen simply had to be 'born a Citizen' of the USA,
i.e., a Citizen by Birth8. See Madison's comment in his journal of the convention re this
fact in which it reports as follows: " ... Copy of a paper Communicated to J. M. by Col.
Hamilton, about the close of the Convention in Philada. 1787, which he said delineated the
Constitution which he would have wished to be proposed by the Convention: He had stated the
principles of it in the course of the deliberations. ..." -- 3 Max Farrand, The Records of the
Federal Convention9 of 1787, at 619-630 (1911) - page 619. But that citizenship status for
who could be President was rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any
person "born a citizen" to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose
to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay via George
Washington, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a "natural born Citizen"10, to block any
chance of the person with foreign influence or allegiances or claims on their allegiance at
birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military. No person having any
foreign influence or claim of allegiance required by them to a foreign country at birth
could serve as a future President. The person must be a "natural born citizen"10 with unity
of citizenship and sole allegiance10 to the United States at birth.

Jay's proposal and recommended clause added the additional adjective of "natural" before
simply being a "born Citizen" which was proposed by Hamilton. And the word and
adjective "natural" means something special from the laws of nature that modify just
being born a Citizen of the USA such as being simply born on the soil of the United States.
Natural means from nature, i.e., by the facts of nature of one's birth. Not created
retroactively after the fact by a man-made law. A natural born Citizen needs no man-made
law to bestow Citizenship on them. The added adjective "natural" comes from Natural
Law which is recognized the world over as universal law and which is the foundation of the
Law of Nations which was codified by Vattel in 1758 in his preeminent legal treatise used
by the founders11, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law6. In Vol.1 Chapter 19
of Vattel's Law of Nations, the "Des citoyens et naturels"12, Vattel in Section 21213 explains

8
Article; Citizen at Birth (CAB) Does Not Equal “natural born Citizen” (NBC) at Birth:
http://www.kerchner.com/images/protectourliberty/johnjay1787lettertogeorgewashington.jpg
9
The Records of The Federal Convention of 1787; p.619: https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/farrand-the-records-of-the-
federal-convention-of-1787-vol-3
10
Constitutional Scholar; Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/04/article-ii-natural-
born-citizen-means.html
11
Benjamin Franklin’s 1775 Letter to Dumas Thanking Him for Three More Copies of Vattel’s Legal Treatise “The
Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-franklin-in-1775-
thanks.html
12
Image of Section in Vattel’s Law of Nations of Principles of Natural Law; French Edition; Des Citoyens et
Naturels (translation -The Natural Citizens): http://www.kerchner.com/images/protectourliberty/vattel-section212-
french.jpg
19
to us (the French term "naturels" was translated to English in 1781 in the Journal of the
Continental Congress14 and in the 1797 English edition of Vattel13), to tell us that the
"natural born Citizens"15 are those born in the country to parents (plural) who are
Citizens of the country when their child is born. These are the natural Citizens of the
nation per universal principles of natural law for which no man-made law is necessary to
explain or justify. Such a person, a natural born Citizen, is born with unity of Citizenship
and sole allegiance at birth10 due to having been both born on the soil AND being born to
two Citizen parents. The person who would be President must be a second-generation
American with no foreign claims of allegiance on them at birth under the law of nations
and natural law, 16the child of two Citizens and born in the USA. This is a much stronger
check to foreign influence than simply being born a Citizen say on the soil of the USA but
with one or the other parent being a foreigner, such as is the case of Obama. The situation
with Obama's birth Citizenship status is exactly the problem that the founders and framers
did not want. They did not want the child of a foreign national, a non-U.S. citizen serving
as President and Commander of our military. This was a national security concern to them.
And it is a national security concern now.

Another founder of our nation and great historian of the American Revolution named
David Ramsay17 contemporaneously defined in a 1789 essay what the term "natural born
Citizen" means. Read a copy of Ramsay's original dissertation at this link18. Other
research papers from history on the term "natural born Citizen" published long before the
current controversy was created by the 2008 election debacle can be read at this link19. The
paper by Breckenridge Long in 1916 is a particularly good one.

Barack Hussein Obama II20 may or may not be a born Citizen of the USA depending on
what the 1961 contemporaneous birth registration documents sealed in Hawaii reveal. And
Americans have good reason to be greatly concerned about the truth as to where he was
physically born as opposed to where his birth may have been falsely registered21 by his
maternal grandmother as occurring in Hawaii as this Catalog of Evidence22 details. But he
can never be a "natural born Citizen of the United States" since his father was a foreigner,
13
Vattel’s Legal Treatise “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” Volume 1, Chapter 19, Section 212:
https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/
14
Article; 1781 Journal of the Continental Congress; proves that the founders and framers knew and understood that
the French word “naturels” meant “natural”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2010/10/08/absolute-proof-the-
founders-knew-and-accepted-vattels-french-naturels-to-mean-natural-born/
15
Image of Vattel’s section 212 in his legal treatise on Natural Law in both French and English side-by-side:
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2010/10/08/absolute-proof-the-founders-knew-and-accepted-vattels-french-
naturels-to-mean-natural-born/
16
Constitutional Scholar; Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-citizen-
clause-requires.html
17
Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defined “natural born Citizen” in 1789:
https://www.scribd.com/document/33676461/Founder-and-Historian-David-Ramsay-Defined-Natural-Born-
Citizenship-in-1789-by-Atty-Mario-Apuzzo
18
A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/33807636/A-Dissertation-on-Manner-of-Acquiring-Character-Privileges-of-Citizen-of-
U-S-by-David-Ramsay-1789
19
Papers Discussing “natural born Citizen” Meaning to Constitutional Standards:
https://www.scribd.com/lists/3301209/Papers-Discussing-Natural-Born-Citizen-Meaning-to-Constitutional-
Standards
20
Barack Obama - Maybe a Citizen of the United State But Is Not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States:
https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/03/obama-maybe-citizen-of-united-states.html
21
How Obama’s Birth Announcement Got in the Hawaiian Newspapers Birth Announcement Section - Obama’s
Birth Falsely Registered by His Maternal Grandmother: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXQHNMlitpY
22
A Catalog of Evidence - Concerned Americans Have Good Reason to Doubt that Putative President Obama Was
Born in Hawaii; Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/catalog-of-evidence-
concerned-americans.html
20
a British Subject who was never a U.S. Citizen and was not even an immigrant to the USA.
Since his father was a British Subject and not a U.S. Citizen when Obama was born,
Obama was born a British Subject23. The founders and framers are probably rolling over
in their graves knowing this person24 was sworn in as the putative President and
Commander of our military.

The founders rejected the acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by birth on the soil25 without
consideration as to who were the parents. That is clear from the history and evolution of
the writing of the eligibility clause in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, which specifies who can
be President and Commander in Chief of the military.

So, can a "born Citizen"26 be President of the USA? The answer is a resounding NO per
the founders and framers. Being a "born Citizen of the United States" is a necessary but
NOT sufficient part of being a "natural born Citizen of the United States". Natural born
Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens
(citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”1 Only a "natural born Citizen"10 can be the
President of the USA and Commander in Chief of our military. Obama is not a natural
born Citizen of the USA and is thus constitutionally not eligible (to constitutional
standards) to serve as President and Commander in Chief of the military.

Dolly Madison Quote du Jour,

" The Constitution was signed September 17, 1787, by 39 brave

men who changed the world."
HAPPY CONSTITUTION DAY!

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)

http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

P.S. Here is a chart that lists and explains the five (5) Citizenship Terms26 used in the U.S.
Constitution.

P.P.S. Being a "born Citizen" or "Citizen at Birth" is not identically the same27 as a being
a "natural born Citizen".

23
Obama was Born a British Subject; Constitutional Scholar; Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog:
https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/12/obama-putative-president-of-us-was-born.html
24
Obama is a Fraud, Master Deceiver, and Constitutionally Ineligible:
https://www.scribd.com/document/37349407/Obama-Ineligible-I-tried-and-lied-but-it-won-t-go-away-Wash-Times-
Natl-Wkly-2010-09-13-pg-15
25
A Constitutional Article II “natural born Citizen” and a British Common Law “natural born Subject” Are Not the
Same; Constitutional Scholar; Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/article-ii-
natural-born-citizen-is-not.html
26
The Five Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution Defined and Legal Reference for Same:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/Citizenship-Terms-Used-in-the-U-S-Constitution-The-5-Terms-Defined-
Some-Legal-Reference-to-Same
27
Citizen at Birth (CAB) Does Not Equal Natural Born Citizen (NBC); CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired);
Attorney Maro Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/07/citizen-at-birth-cab-does-not-equal.html
21
P.P.P.S. Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen of the United States” to U.S.
Constitutional standards. Read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born
Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born
Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)”. All “natural born Citizens” are
“born Citizens (citizens at birth) but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural
born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-
and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-
born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ Also read the “Three Legged
Stool Test” for Natural Born Citizen http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/the-
three-legged-stool-test-analogy-for-natural-born-citizenship-of-the-united-states-to-
constitutional-standards/ … AND … https://www.scribd.com/document/161994312/Article-
II-Presidential-Eligibility-Facts Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional
scholar Dr. Herb Titus: http://www.kerchner.com/videos/NBC-parts-1&2-by-Dr-Herb-
Titus.mp4

22
 A Simple Euler Logic Diagram Shows the Logical
Relationship of a Constitutional Article II "natural born
Citizen" to Other Kinds of "Citizens" of the United States

A Simple Euler Logic Diagram Shows the Logical Relationship of "natural born Citizens" to
Other Type "Citizens" of the United States. A "natural born Citizen" is the largest subset of
the super-sets of Born a “Citizen" aka “Citizen” at Birth aka “Citizen” by Birth and "All
U.S. Citizens". The "natural born Citizens" are the overwhelming majority of U.S. Citizens.
It is from this set that the Constitution tells us to choose our President. Only a “natural born
Citizen” can constitutionally be the President and Commander in Chief, or the VP.

23
24
 CITIZENSHIP STATUS of the PRESIDENTS OF USA
Grandfathered, Eligible, or Natural Born Citizen Frauds
Eligibility under U.S. Constitution Article II Section 1
Original Citizen1 i.e. the 'Grandfather’ Clause (GFC)
or “Natural Born Citizen”2 (NBC) Clause or Were They Frauds
and Unconstitutionally and Illegally Seated as President
by: CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)3, Lehigh Valley PA USA
Originally Compiled: 16 Feb 2009 -- Last Updated 20 Jan 2017
http://www.protectourliberty.org
Note: For Natural Born Citizenship (NBC) clause status per natural law and the law of nations and relevant U.S.
Supreme Court rulings such as Venus (1814), Minor v Happersett (1875)4, and Perkins v Elg (1939)5; it is not
where the parents were born that is controlling but whether or not both parents were Citizens of the United
States (via birth or naturalization) at the time of the birth of their child in the USA. Both parents6 must be U.S.
Citizens when their child is born in the USA for that child to be a “natural born Citizen” of the USA. It is
important to note that until recent times foreign-born women gained naturalized status upon marrying a U.S.
Citizen husband or upon the naturalization of the husband under the legal concept of citizenship fusion in a
marriage. The Citizenship of the wife was always legally fused to that of her husband until more recent times.

1. George WASHINGTON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born on 22 Feb 1732 in VA.
2. John ADAMS – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born on 30 Oct 1735 in MA.
3. Thomas JEFFERSON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born on 13 Apr 1743 in VA.
4. James MADISON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born on 16 Mar 1751 in VA.
5. James MONROE – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born in 1758 in VA.
6. John Quincy ADAMS – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born in 1767 in MA.
7. Andrew JACKSON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born in 1767 in Carolinas.
8. Martin VAN BUREN - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1782 in NY. This was
the first President who was eligible under the NBC clause. He was born in the USA to two Citizen parents.
His parents were original Citizens who gained their citizenship by adhering to the Revolution in 1776.
9. William Henry HARRISON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) - was born in 1773 in VA.
10. John TYLER - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1790 in VA.
11. James K. POLK - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1795 in NC.
12. Zachary TAYLOR - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1784 in VA.
13. Millard FILLMORE - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1800 in NY.

1
Original Citizens: https://www.scribd.com/doc/33807636/A-Dissertation-on-Manner-of-Acquiring-Character-Privileges-of-Citizen-
of-U-S-by-David-Ramsay-1789
2
The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term in Our U.S. Constitution:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/300919680/
3
CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s Blog: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
4
U.S. Supreme Court Decision of Minor v Happersett (1875): http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html#Supreme%20Court
5
U.S. Supreme Court Decision of Perkins v Elg (1939): http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html#Supreme%20Court
6
Born in the USA to Parents Who Are Both Citizens at the Time of the Child's Birth:
http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html#Supreme%20Court

25
14. Franklin PIERCE - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1804 in NY.
15. James BUCHANAN - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1791 in PA. His father
James Sr. was foreign-born (Irish) and came to Pennsylvania in 1783. His parents married circa 1788. By
the time James Jr. was born in 1791 his father had already become a large landowner and a naturalized
Citizen of the Sovereign Commonwealth of PA via the process outlined in the PA 1776 Constitution7. He
was a large land owner and to own land in PA one had to "naturalize" under the process outlined in the PA
1776 Constitution, i.e., take the Oath of Allegiance and live in the state for one year. In James Sr.'s case, he
was living in PA for 8 years before James Jr. was born. Thus James Sr. was a Citizen of the United States
by being a Citizen of one of the original 13 colonies. Having a foreign-born parent is OK if the foreign-
born parent has become a naturalized Citizen of the U.S. before the child being born.
16. Abraham LINCOLN - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1809 in KY.
17. Andrew JOHNSON – Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1808 in NC. He was
seated due to the assassination of President Lincoln.
18. Ulysses S. GRANT - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1822 in OH.
19. Rutherford B. HAYES - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1822 in OH.
20. James GARFIELD - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1831 in OH.
21. Chester A. ARTHUR - Not an NBC or original Citizen. He was NOT an Article II NBC since he was born before his
father's naturalization. He was seated due to the assassination of President Garfield. But based on
the facts uncovered8 in later history, he was unconstitutionally seated due to the falsified nativity
story and fraud by Chester Arthur which was not fully discovered and proven until long after his
death. He burned his early family records to cover up his lies and fraud. He was born circa 1829,
allegedly in VT.
22. Grover CLEVELAND - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1837 in NJ.
23. Benjamin HARRISON - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1833 in OH.
24. Grover CLEVELAND - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1837 in NJ.
25. William MCKINLEY - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1843 in OH.
26. Theodore ROOSEVELT - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1858 in NY. He was
seated due to the assassination of President McKinley.
27. William Howard TAFT - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1857 in OH.
28. Woodrow WILSON - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1856 in VA. His mother
was a foreign-born U.S. Citizen, English, but when he was born she had become a naturalized Citizen of
the United States before his birth due to her marriage to Woodrow's father, a U.S. Citizen. Having a
foreign-born parent is OK if the foreign-born parent has become a naturalized Citizen of the U.S. before the
child is born.
29. Warren G. HARDING - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1865 in OH.
30. Calvin COOLIDGE - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1872 in VT.
31. Herbert HOOVER - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1874 in IA. His mother
was a foreign-born U.S. Citizen, a Canadian, but when he was born she had become a naturalized Citizen
of the United States before his birth due to her marriage to Herbert’s father, a U.S. Citizen. Having a
foreign-born parent is OK if the foreign-born parent has become a naturalized Citizen of the U.S. before the
child being born.
32. Franklin D. ROOSEVELT - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1882 in NY.
33. Harry S. TRUMAN - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1884 in MO.

7
Pennsylvania 1776 Constitution: https://www.paconstitution.org/texts-of-the-constitution/1776-2/
8
Chester A. Arthur Not a Natural Born Citizen: https://citizenwells.net/natural-born-citizen-obama-not-eligible-leo-donofrio-us-
presidents-precedents-chester-arthur-james-buchanan-andrew-johnson-woodrow-wilson-herbert-hoover-chester-arthurs-lies-us-
constituti/

26
34. Dwight D. EISENHOWER - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1890 in TX.
35. John F. KENNEDY - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1917 in MA.
36. Lyndon B. JOHNSON - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1908 in TX. He was
seated due to the assassination of President Kennedy.
37. Richard M. NIXON - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1913 in CA.
38. Gerald R. FORD - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1913 in NE.
39. James CARTER - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1924 in GA.
40. Ronald REAGAN - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1911 in IL.
41. George H. W. BUSH - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1924 in MA.
42. William J. CLINTON - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1946 in AR.
43. George W. BUSH - Article II (NBC) both parents were Citizens when he was born - was born in 1946 in CT.
44. (Putative President) Barack Hussein OBAMA – Not a natural born Citizen (NBC). His father was a foreign national and
British Subject and was NOT a U.S. Citizen. His father was never a U.S. Citizen nor was Obama’s
father even an immigrant to the USA or even a permanent resident in the USA. We are a nation of
immigrants but Obama’s father was not one! Obama is the first President since the founding
generation that had a father who was not an immigrant to the USA. His father was only sojourning
in the USA attending college, first in Hawaii and then later at Harvard University in Massachusetts,
and was deported back to Kenya at the request of Harvard University due to his unseemly activities
there. Obama was sworn in and seated due to FRAUD about his nativity story and the progressive
domination and corruption in both major political parties and also in the mainstream media of the
legal and constitutional meaning of NBC and due to the willful complicity and neglect of Congress.
Obama was born in 1961. Obama himself claimed he was born in Kenya9 for many years in the various
editions of his pre-2007 book agent’s biographies for him. After 2007 Obama claimed he was born in HI10
but his birth registration there most likely was falsified by the maternal grandmother (to get her new
grandson much desired and coveted U.S. Citizenship) since no official hospital record of his birth has been
produced. A PDF version of an alleged long-form birth certificate has been posted online by Obama but it
has been proven to be a computer-manufactured forgery11 by AZ Sheriff Arpaio and his Lead Investigator
Mike Zullo. They have also proved that Obama’s alleged draft registration card12 is a forgery too. The laws
in HI were very lax in regard to the registration of births. There is no independent evidence of Obama being
born in HI. No pre-natal records and no post-natal records for his mother being in HI during the alleged
birth month in 1961 have been found. No name of an attending physician, midwife, or paramedic called to
the scene of a speculated home birth report exists. No independent witnesses to the claimed birth in Hawaii
have ever been named or surfaced. No post-natal care records exist in Hawaii for the care of Obama’s
mother or the child. There is no record13 at all for his mother even being in Hawaii in August 1961, the
alleged month of Obama’s alleged birth in Hawaii. No records exist of her being in HI for the 6 months
before the alleged birth date. As to the much-touted two newspaper announcements, false registration of a
birth at home in HI with no witnesses would have generated the vital record in HI and also would have
automatically generated the two newspaper ads. Those ads were placed automatically by the state as a
result of ALL birth registrations – real or falsified! And to further contradict the Hawaiian birth nativity
story of Obama, there are many accounts by Obama’s paternal family in Kenya, Kenyan government
officials, and Kenyan and African newspapers -- that Obama was born in a hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

9
Numerous Public Record Accounts That Obama Was Born in Kenya: https://www.scribd.com/lists/3248475/Kenyan-Gov-Officials-
African-Newspapers-Obama-1991-Bio-Barry-Obama-Obama-Family-Mbrs-and-other-Accounts-Reporting-Obama-is-Kenyan-Born
10
Prior to 2007, Obama Changed His Book Bio From Born in Kenya to Born in Hawaii:
https://www.scribd.com/document/93986071/Obama-s-Bio-in-1991-Literary-Agent-Promo-Booklet-States-Obama-Born-in-Kenya-
Raised-in-Indonesia-Reported-at-Breitbart-17May2012
11
Obama Birth Documents and Other Key ID Documents are Forgeries: https://www.scribd.com/lists/3166684/Obama-s-Birth-Cert-
Other-Key-Docs-Draft-Reg-Card-Forged-Expert-Reports
12
Obama’s Draft Registration Card is a Back Dated Forgery: https://www.scribd.com/lists/3624690/Obama-Draft-Registration-Back-
Dated-Forged
13
A Suggested Narrative of Where Obama's Mother Was: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/a-suggested-narrative-how-
obama-is-born-in-kenya-and-has-hawaiian-birth-registration-record/

27
 Obama himself was the first “Birther”14 by stating for years he was born in Kenya. He created that narrative
over many years in his early life narratives. Again, before 2007 Obama himself15 touted to the world that he
was born in Kenya as exemplified by the book agent’s biography published and re-edited over many years
as Obama’s career unfolded but always saying he was born in Kenya, up until 2007 when he decided to run
for President and the massive scrubbing, forging, and re-creation of his life history and records began. No
other President in history has had so many accounts attesting to his being foreign-born and/or can provide
NO contemporaneous birth witnesses or independent evidence to corroborate their subsequent claim to U.S.
birth. There is a disinformation technique called “The Big Lie”. Obama is “The Big Lie”!16
45. Donald J. Trump - Article II (NBC) - both parents were U.S. Citizens when he was born in the USA – He was born in 1946
in NY. His father was born in NY and was a U.S. Citizen by birth. His mother was born in Scotland but
became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1942 - four years before Donald Trump was born. Thus both of Donald
Trump’s parents were U.S. Citizens when he was born in the USA.

See an excellent article’s URL in the footnotes below and learn more about: “The Who, What, When,
Where, Why, and How of the "natural born Citizen" Term in Our U.S. Constitution”17

14
The Far-Left Saul Alinsky Rules For Radicals Tactic of Giving the Enemy a Pejorative Name:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/birther
15
Obama Many Times Over Many Years Touted That He Was Born in Kenya: https://www.scribd.com/lists/3248475/Kenyan-Gov-
Officials-African-Newspapers-Obama-1991-Bio-Barry-Obama-Obama-Family-Mbrs-and-other-Accounts-Reporting-Obama-is-
Kenyan-Born
16
Obama is the Big Lie!: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/the-big-lie-obama-is-the-living-example-and-personification-
of-the-big-lie-propaganda-technique-obama-is-the-big-lie-by-cdr-kerchner-ret/
17
The Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term in Our U.S. Constitution:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/300919680/

28
 Natural Born Citizen = 3 Leaf Clover Citizens < > 4 Leaf Type

by: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Retired)

Writing with the Name de Plume of Mountain Publius Goat1
Written: 7 Nov 2008
Regarding the term "natural born citizen"2 (NBC) term in our U.S. Constitution3, it is not a very
limited club and category of citizenship. It is exactly the opposite. NBCs are the most common,
garden variety, most populous group of citizenship that exists in a typical nation and is typically
by far the most populous group or class of citizenship in virtually all nations. Thus, we have a
very, very large pool of NBCs from which to choose a President and CINC. We don't need to
search the ranks of those with foreign allegiances and foreign influence and foreign powers'
claims on them by birth. The pool of NBCs is vast in our nation.
An analogy: Natural born Citizens are the 3 Leaf Clover kinds of Citizens, not the 4 Leaf
Clover kinds. They are not rare but the most frequently occurring kind in a nation. Those that
are born in the country to two citizens of a country, i.e., the "natural born Citizens" are the
largest group of citizens in this country.
An Idea: Go buy a three-leaf clover pin and pin it on your lapel. And when people ask you why
you are wearing a three-leaf clover, tell them it signifies that you are a "natural born Citizen".
Then explain why.
Regarding Obama, no matter where he claimed he was born at various stages in his life because
his father was not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born and never was. Obama's father was not
even an immigrant to the USA and was never even a permanent resident here. Obama's father
was a foreigner simply here for a couple of years on a student or diplomatic visa. And then he
went home to Kenya. He was a foreigner in the truest sense of the meaning of that terminology
as it was used by John Jay in his letter to General George Washington about what type of

1
Archives and website for writings using the name de plume Mountain Publius Goat:
http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/goatsledge/table.htm
2
Presidential Eligibility Clause in U.S. Constitution - Article II Section 1 Clause 5: http://press-
pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_5.html
3
Constitution of the United States and First Twelve Amendments: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch1s9.html

29
citizen cannot serve as President and what type of citizenship is required to serve as the
President and Commander in Chief of our Army for our new nation in the future. And General
Washington agreed that it should only be a "natural born Citizen" of the new nation, for this
singular most powerful office in our new nation, with the grandfather clause put into Article II
of that requirement to exempt the generation there at the time the Constitution was adopted. For
any other political office in our country beyond the Pres and VP, ordinary citizenship is fine.
But for the Pres and VP, you must be a Natural Born Citizenship and have 100% allegiance to
this nation by birth in the country to two citizens of the country, and allegiance to no other, nor
with any claim on you by another country or power, solely by the events of nature at your birth,
not any retro-active after the fact citizenship granted by the laws of man.
As a further idea and as a suggestion, the three-leaf clover could be the symbol of "the birthers".
As Teo says, the "Birthers" name tag was put on us by the O-Bots in the press to try and mock
and ridicule us using their Saul Alinsky rule #5 and #12 training. It was meant to ridicule us but
it went on too long and it has backfired on them. Alinsky rule #10 and #6. They need to go back
to Alinsky School for a refresher course from Obama and ACORN as they have fallen into a
"Teo the Bear" trap with this name tag the O-Bots chose for patriots and constitutionalists. That
name tag has now been adopted as a badge of pride by our side. It now stands for the rebirth of
our Constitutional Republic and our Constitution which Obama and his Obot supporters have
trampled on thus far. So it’s back to the drawing board for the O-Bots.
See Teo Bear's new site: http://www.birthers.org4 Again, those that are born in the country to
two citizens of a country, i.e., the "natural born citizens" are the largest group of citizens in this
country -- the 3 leaf clover variety – of the various kinds of citizenship mentioned in our U.S.
Constitution.5

Mountain Publius Goat

Location: Mountain Publius Goat’s Ledge1 in the Mountains of Pennsylvania

"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of liberalism, they will
adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without
knowing how it happened." Norman Thomas

4
Birthers.org website: http://www.birthers.org
5
The Five Kinds of Citizens Mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: https://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/Citizenship-Terms-Used-in-
the-U-S-Constitution-The-5-Terms-Defined-Some-Legal-Reference-to-Same

30
 Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution -- Defined & Some Legal References to Same
U.S. Citizenship
Status of the Conjunction (And, Conjunction (And,
Constitutional Term Location of Birth Other Legal Reference
Parents at Time of Or) Or)
Child's Birth

U.S. Constitution, 14th

Born to at least one Naturalized Citizen Amendment, Section 1.
Born in the USA &
"Citizen" of the United States U.S. citizen parent (citizenship given by U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark
(Referenced many places in Constitution) (citizenship given by OR Subject to the OR law via Federal (WKA), 169 U.S. 649 (1898).
Jurisdiction Thereof. U.S. Federal Statutes such
law) Statutes)
as Title 8, Section 1401.

"Citizen of the United States at time of Citizen of the United

Adoption of this Constitution" aka "the States at time of U.S. Constitution, Article II,
Grandfather Clause" aka "Original Citizen" Adoption of the Section 1, Clause 5.
(Stated in Article II) Constitution

U.S. Constitution, 14th

Amendment, Section1. U.S.
v. Wong Kim Ark (WKA), 169
U.S. 649 (1898) Note: Under
"Born Citizen" of the United States (Referenced, Born in the USA & the WKA Supreme Court
established, and rights clarified in the 14th Subject to the Ruling, subject to the
Amendment) Jurisdiction Thereof jusisdiction thereof, meant
both parents had to be
legally domiciled in the USA
when the child was born in
the USA.

Citizenship rights
obtained by
processes governed
by Federal Statutes
including person
"Naturalized Citizen" of the United States U.S. Constitution, 14th
swearing an Oath of
(Referenced and rights clarified in the 14th Not Born in the USA AND Allegiance to the
Amendment, Section 1.
Amendment) U.S. Federal Statutes
USA & renouncing
any and all foreign
allegiances such as
to any Prince or
Potentate

"natural born Citizens"

are the children of
"Natural Born Citizen" of the United States
Citizens (plural). It
(Referenced only in Article II as one of the specific
does not matter if the U.S. Constitution, Article II,
qualification requirements to serve as the President
Both parents are parents were Section 1, Clause 5. Law of
and Commander in Chief in the USA) Note: This
U.S. citizens of any naturalized Citizens or Nations, Book 1, Chapter 19,
type of citizen of a nation is a citizen via "natural
type when child is were born Citizens. Section 212. Supreme Court
law" and cannot be given by any man made law.
Just a long as BOTH cases: Venus (1814), Minor
The acts of nature itself gave this person natural born. The parents
born citizenship of the nation. This is typically the could have obtained AND Born in the USA. father and mother v. Happersett (1874),
were U.S. Citizens Perkins v. Elg. 307 U.S. 325
largest group in any nation which has been in their basic when their child is (1939). Also, comments by
existence for a couple generations or more. It is Citizenship by birth born in the USA. A Congressman and Judge
also the group which innately has the strongest or by naturalization. "natural born Citizen" John Bingham a framer of
natural allegiance to the nation and the least
is born with Unity of the 14th Amendment.
potential foreign familial or other foreign influences
Citizenship and Sole
on them.
Allegiance at birth to
only the USA.

Originally Prepared in Fall 2008. New Version Prepared: 02 Feb 2009 Last Updated: 31 May 2011 Copyright © 2009-2012 CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) aka M Publius Goat. All Rights Reserved.

31
32
 Kinds of Citizens Defined
By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret)

Written: 12 August 2021

Citizen: A person owing loyalty and allegiance to a country, and entitled by

birth circumstances under Natural Law or via naturalization laws, acts,
amendments, or treaties (naturalized at birth or later after birth) to the
protection of state, nation, or country.

Original Citizen: A person alive and living in the original 13 colonies on 4

July 1776 when the Declaration of Independence from England was signed
and who thereafter adhered to and gave their allegiance to the new nation.
See U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 which has a
grandfather clause therein for the Original Citizens so they would be
eligible to serve as President and Commander in Chief until the “natural
born Citizens”, the children of the Original Citizens came of age to serve in
that office.

Naturalized Citizen: A person, who by man-made positive law, e.g.,

enacted statutory laws, acts, amendments, or treaties, is made a Citizen of a
state, nation, or country. In the USA this can be achieved by the action of
Congress granting citizenship collectively at birth as a member of a class of
persons listed and defined in 8 USC Section 1401 and/or under the 14th
Amendment, or a person doing so individually after birth under relevant
immigration and naturalization law passed by Congress. Such Citizens can
at birth be born a Citizen of more than one country under the laws of the
United States and other countries.

Natural Born Citizen: A person born in the state, nation, or country whose
parents were both Citizens of said state, nation, or country when their child
was born, and is thus a person who is not a Citizen of any other state,
nation, or country at the time of their birth, and thus whose “Unity of
Citizenship” of that state, nation, or country is thus without any doubt
under Natural Law. No positive, man-made law is necessary to affirm their
citizenship. A "natural born Citizen" (nbC) is a child born in the country of
two citizen parents who were Citizens of any kind when their child was
born. An "nbC" child is born with no innate foreign influence and
allegiance to another country at birth. See the Minor v Happersett (1875)
and the Perkins v Elg (1939) U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

33
34
Benjamin Franklin in 1775 Thanked
Charles Dumas of the Netherlands for
Sending Him Three More Copies of the
Newest Edition of Vattel’s Law of Nations
Originally Written & Posted Online by CDR Kerchner (Ret) @
Puzo1.BlogSpot.com: Monday, April 26, 2010 @ 8:37 PM
Benjamin Franklin in 1775 thanked Charles Dumas1 of the Netherlands for
sending him 3 more copies of the newest edition of Vattel’s Law of Nations

Another founder of our nation and framer of our Constitution, Benjamin Franklin, was also
quite familiar and well-versed with the writings of Vattel as early as 1775 when he wrote to
Charles Dumas in the Netherlands and thanked him for sending Franklin 3 copies of the
newest edition of Vattel (in French)2. Franklin commented to Dumas that his previous
personal copy was in heavy demand by the other delegates to the Continental Congress
meeting in 1775. Dumas had recently edited and published a new edition of Vattel (in the
original French) in the Netherlands. Franklin and most of the founders were fluent in
French which was the diplomatic language of that time. Dumas also made comments in his

1
Constitutional Scholar, Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-
franklin-in-1775-thanks.html
2
Google Books:
https://books.google.com/books?id=svE7AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA5&dq=benjamin+franklin+vattel&ei=W-
yPStrRNaf4ygS12bC3Bw#v=onepage&q=benjamin%20franklin%20vattel&f=false

35
writings to Franklin about Vattel’s enlightened writings and vision for a new form of
government for a nation where the people were sovereign and the unique opportunity for its
application to the affairs in America in the colonies splitting from Great Britain. The words
found in our Declaration of Independence mentioning the “Laws of Nature” and the phrase
mentioning unalienable rights such as “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” are right out
of Volume 1 of Vattel. As are the words of seeking a more perfect union in the Preamble of
our Constitution were also inspired by the teachings and writings of Vattel. Thus it is quite
evident that the founders read and used Vattel extensively. Here is a reprint of the letter
from Franklin to Dumas thanking him for sending the books.

Benjamin Franklin to: Charles William Frederic Dumas

———————————————————————–

Dear Sir,

Philadelphia, 9 December, 1775.

I received your several favors, of May 18th, June 30th, and July 8th, by Messrs. Vaillant
and Pochard;(1) whom if I could serve upon your recommendation, it would give me great
pleasure. Their total want of English is at present an obstruction to their getting any
employment among us; but I hope they will soon obtain some knowledge of it. This is a
good country for artificers or farmers; but gentlemen of mere science in les belles lettres
cannot so easily subsist here, there being little demand for their assistance among an
industrious people, who, as yet, have not much leisure for studies of that kind.

I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came
to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently
to consult the law of nations. Accordingly that copy, which I kept, (after depositing one in
our own public library here, and sending the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as
you directed,) has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now
sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and
just esteem for their author. Your manuscript “Idee sur le Gouvernement et la Royaute” is
also well relished, and may, in time, have its effect. I thank you, likewise, for the other
smaller pieces, which accompanied Vattel. “Le court Expose de ce qui s’est passe entre la
Cour Britannique et les Colonies,” bc. being a very concise and clear statement of facts,
will be reprinted here for the use of our new friends in Canada. The translations of the
proceedings of our Congress are very acceptable. I send you herewith what of them has
been farther published here, together with a few newspapers, containing accounts of some
of the successes Providence has favored us with. We are threatened from England with a
very powerful force, to come next year against us.(2) We are making all the provision in
our power here to oppose that force, and we hope we shall be able to defend ourselves. But,
as the events of war are always uncertain, possibly, after another campaign, we may find it
necessary to ask the aid of some foreign power.

————————————————————————

36
Source: http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-
new2?id=DelVol02.xml&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&ta
g=public&part=459&division=div1

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)

http://puzo1.blogspot.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org

P.S. See this prior post I made about President George Washington consulting Vattel as
America's new President in 1789: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/george-washington-
consulted-legal.html

P.P.S. See this post about Thomas Jefferson owning and using a copy of Vattel in his
efforts of founding the new nation and writing the Declaration of Independence:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/thomas-jefferson-founder-of-our-nation.html

P.P.P.S. The legal treatise, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law, known as the
Law of Nations for short, defined the term "naturel" or "natural born Citizen" as a person
born in the country of parents (plural) who both were Citizens of the country:
https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/

37
38
Thomas Jefferson, a Founder of Our
Nation and Influential in Framing Our
Constitution, Used His Copy of the 1775
French Edition of ‘The Law of Nations or
Principles of Natural Law’ by Vattel
Originally Written & Posted Online by CDR Kerchner (Ret)
@ Puzo1.BlogSpot.com: Sunday, May 2, 2010 @ 12:34 PM
Thomas Jefferson, a Founder of Our Nation1 and Influential in Framing
Our Constitution, Used His Copy of the 1775 French Edition of 'The Law
of Nations or Principles of Natural Law' by Vattel

Thomas Jefferson a Founder of Our Nation and Influential in the Framing of Our
Constitution used his copy of the 1775 French edition of "The Law of Nations or
Principles of Natural Law by Vattel", a newly edited edition by Charles Dumas in 1775,
to help write and influence others in the writing of the founding documents. The founders
and framers were fluent in French, the diplomatic language of the time, many having
served as diplomats2 to France. Thomas Jefferson3 used his copy of the new 1775 French
edition of the Vattel’s Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law4 to write the
Declaration of Independence5. He was also very influential in the creation of the U.S.

1
Constitutional Scholar, Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/thomas-
jefferson-founder-of-our-nation.html
2
Various Founders and Framers Served as Ambassadors to France:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ambassadors_of_the_United_States_to_France
3
Biography of Thomas Jefferson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson
4
The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law in French:
https://famguardian.org/Publications/LawOfNations/vattel.htm
5
The Founding Documents: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs

39
Constitution5. Quotations such as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, “Laws of
Nature” and concepts for a new “more perfect” form of government with a written
Constitution and independent Judiciary and the sovereignty of the People are right out of
Vattel’s Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law. In 1776 Jefferson was tasked with
primary responsibility for drafting the Declaration of Independence3 and if you read it
after first reading Vattel’s Law of Nations, Volume 1, you can see where he got his
inspiration for many of the words and concepts. Jefferson was very influential via his
correspondence6 to the Constitutional Convention7 in Philadelphia Pa in 1787 and in
getting the Bill of Rights added. Read Vattel’s Law of Nations, Volume 1 first. Then read
the Constitution. We can see in the words of the Constitution the impact of Vattel and the
Law of Nations once again in the words therein such as “in order to form a more perfect
Union” (perfection of government to serve the people was a prime directive of Vattel)8.
And the title of the book Law of Nations, the preeminent legal treatise of the time, is even
mentioned in the Constitution in Article I, Section 8, in the enumerated and limited
powers of the new federal republic form of government. The impact of Vattel and
Volume 1 of his legal treatise The Law of Nations8 on his visions for a new form of
government on the founders and framers of this nation and its founding documents
cannot be overstated. Vattel was the keystone legal source for the new federal
government established in 1789 when the new Constitution was ratified, the first of its
kind in the world and a beacon of liberty to the rest of the world, with the ratification of
the U.S. Constitution.

Jefferson's personal and well annotated in margins copy of Vattel's Law of Nations or
Principles of Natural Law 1775 French edition is now in the possession of the Library of
Congress9. I suspect that this copy was one of the 3 copies sent to Benjamin Franklin by
Charles Dumas in 1775. Franklin's copy of the 1775 edition was never found in history.
We also know that Franklin also had a copy of an earlier edition10 of Vattel. I suspect he
loaned one of the three newly received 1775 editions of Vattel to Jefferson for use in the
writing of the Declaration of Independence and that is how that copy got to Jefferson.
The other two copies of the 1775 edition sent to Franklin ended up with one copy in the
Library in Philadelphia for use by the Congress meeting in Philadelphia and the other in
the library of "The College of Massachusetts Bay” in Massachusetts. So maybe I’ve
solved the mystery of what happened to the 3rd copy sent by Dumas, Franklin's copy of
the 1775 Dumas edition of the Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law.

6
Thomas Jefferson Correspondence: https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/jefffed.html
7
Constitutional Convention of the United States:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Convention_(United_States)
8
Vattel’s Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law:
https://famguardian.org/Publications/LawOfNations/vattel_01.htm#%EF%BF%BD%2021.%20A%20natio
n%20ought%20to%20perfect%20itself%20and%20the%20state.
9
Thomas Jefferson's copy of the Law of Nations by Vattel Now in Library of Congress:
http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/jeffersoncopylawofnationsinlibraryofcongress.pdf
10
Benjamin Franklin had an earlier edition of Vattel's legal treatise even before he received three more
copies in 1775: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-franklin-in-1775-thanks.html

40
Charles Kerchner, Commander USNR (Retired)
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner v Obama & Congress

http://puzo1.blogspot.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org

P.S. Thomas Jefferson was one of the first founders that I have found a written record of
using the term "natural born Citizen" in his writings. See this account11 in 1777.

P.P.S.: See more about the founders' and framers' use of The Law of Nations or
Principles of Natural Law to write the founding documents for our Constitutional
Republic in the links below. The legal treatise, The Law of Nations or Principles of
Natural Law, known as the Law of Nations for short, clearly defined the term “naturel” or
“natural born Citizen” as a person born in the country of parents (plural)12 who were
Citizens of the country.

1. Benjamin Franklin in 1775 thanked Charles Dumas of the Netherlands for sending him
three more copies of the newest 1775 French edition of Vattel's Law of Nations:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-franklin-in-1775-thanks.html

2. President George Washington in the year 1789 consulted Vattel's legal treatise The
Law of Nations as America's new President: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/george-
washington-consulted-legal.html

11
Thomas Jefferson's early use of the term "natural born citizen":
http://www.kerchner.com/images/protectourliberty/thomasjefferson-nbc-term-1777.jpg
12
Constitutional Scholar, Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-
born-citizen-clause-requires.html

41
42
George Washington Consulted the Legal
Treatise “Law of Nations”
Originally Written & Posted Online by CDR Kerchner (Ret) @
Puzo1.BlogSpot.com: Friday, April 23, 2010 @ 11:27 AM
George Washington Consulted the Legal Treatise “Law of Nations” during
his Early Months in Office1

A historical account from the times of what the newly sworn-in President George
Washington was doing with the legal treatise and reference book Law of Nations2 in New
York in 1789.

There was a news account recently that President George Washington borrowed3 the legal
reference book “Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”2 and never returned it to the
library in New York and now owes a huge past due fine on that book. This new current
events story ties into the importance of that book to George Washington and the other
founders. Attached is an image and an account of what the new President was doing with
the book in 1789 in New York. The new President was found consulting that book by
visitors to his office during his early months in office after his inauguration in New York in
1789.

1
Constitutional Scholar, Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/george-
washington-consulted-legal.html
2
The Law of Nations by Vattel: https://famguardian.org/Publications/LawOfNations/vattel.htm
3
George Washington borrowed the Law of Nations legal treatise by Vattel from NY library and never
returned it: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/apr/18/george-washington-library-new-york

43
New York was then the capital of the USA. See attached highlighted section of the history
book: “This Was New York, The Nation’s Capital in 1789”4, by Monaghan & Lowenthal,
published by Books for Libraries Press of Freeport NY.

I have a copy of this rare book. But it can also be viewed online at the Google Books4 site.

4
Book; This Was New York, The Nation's Capital in 1789:
https://books.google.com/books?id=J4TLJwyvm68C&printsec=frontcover&dq=this+was+new+york+monagh
an&ei=AN_MS7yLL4f4lQTj_8CsBw&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

44
45
46
The Law of Nations by Vattel is a very important legal treatise5 and was very important to
the founding of our nation and writing the Constitution. It was first published in 1758. The
Law of Nations is mentioned in our Constitution6 in Article I, Section 8. The “Law of
Nations or Principles of Natural Law” which is its full name was the preeminent legal
treatise of the last half of the 1700s and was depended on heavily by the Revolutionary
Patriots in the founding of our nation.

Benjamin Franklin cited that it was heavily used during the Constitutional Conventions7
when he received three new copies of the newest circa 1775 edition from the editor Dumas
in Europe. And John Jay the 1st Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court cited it often. This
legal book was cited many times by the various U.S. Supreme Courts in the 1800s and
much of it became the common law of our land via Supreme Court decisions citing the
wisdom conveyed in this book.

And it is this legal treatise by Vattel that defines who the "naturel" citizens are, i.e., the
"natural born Citizens”2 of a country, i.e., a person born in the country to two citizen
parents of that country. This was the law of nature and Vattel codified it in his book Law of
Nations or Principles of Natural Law.

This book was the source of the wisdom which prompted John Jay to write to George
Washington, presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention in the summer of 1787, and
request that the requirement of “natural born Citizenship” be put into the new Constitution
as an eligibility standard for the office of the President and commander of the military, for
future holders of that office after the original generation past, to minimize any chances of
foreign influences on that singular most powerful office in our new nation.

The founders and framers in their wisdom anticipated the day would come when a citizen
of the world funded by foreign money would attempt to take over America. That day has
come. Obama is not a "natural born Citizen" of the USA. He was born a subject of Great
Britain. He is not Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 constitutionally eligible to be the President
and Commander in Chief of the military for exactly the reasons John Jay stated to George
Washington in the summer of 1787.

Obama is a Usurper8 in the Oval Office and must be removed by We the People.

5
Constitutional Scholar, Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Blog: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/08/law-of-nations-
and-not-english-common.html
6
The Founding Documents: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs
7
Benjamin Franklin stated in 1775 Vattel’s Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law was widely used and
in great demand at the Continental Congress’s Convention: https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-
franklin-in-1775-thanks.html
8
Obama is a Usurper; Washington Times National Edition 2010 newspaper ad:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/26221161/Obama-an-Unconstitutional-Illegal-President-20100201-Issue-Wash-
Times-Natl-Wkly-pg-5

47
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania

http://puzo1.blogspot.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org

P.S. See this post for another founder and framer who sought answers from Vattel:
Benjamin Franklin in 1775 thanked Charles Dumas of the Netherlands for sending him 3
more copies of the newest edition of Vattel's Law of Nations

P.P.S. See this post about Thomas Jefferson owning and using a copy of Vattel in his
efforts of founding the new nation and writing of the Declaration of Independence:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/thomas-jefferson-founder-of-our-nation.html

P.P.P.S. The legal treatise, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law, known as the
Law of Nations for short, defined the term "naturel" or "natural born Citizen" as a person
born in the country of parents (plural) who were both Citizens of the country:
https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/

48
 Published by:
C. F. Kerchner & Associates, Inc.
3765 Chris Drive
Emmaus PA 18049 USA
http://www.kerchner.com/books/naturalborncitizen.htm