Malihi/Georgia Abstain….

Not only did  John Jay, Secretary of State at the time of the writing of the Constitution, and later First Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, as well as one of the three authors of The Federalists, originate the “natural-born citizen” requirement – by suggesting it in a letter to Convention President George Washington, on July 25, 1787, one day after the original draft was started by John Rutledge and his Committee of Detail – but he was joined by fellow Federalist authors, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, who, as members of the Committee of Style and Arrangement, wrote it into the final draft some six weeks later.  In other words, while it didn’t make it into the first draft, it was shepherded into the final document by the three central figures who championed the Constitution to the colonists for their subsequent ratification.

So think of it, here we had ALL THREE of the writers (under the alias of Publius) of The Federalists – THE universally-recognized means of persuading the citizens of the various states to RATIFY the Constitution.  One of them, Jay, recommended the requirment to our first Commander in Chief, and later first President, George Washington, and the other two wrote it into the Final Draft, where it was voted on, passed, and ratified…and remains to this day.

So two weeks ago, the good judge, Michael Malihi, in a Georgia State Court, cites some obscure ruling from an inferior court in Indiana, while failing to provide any explanation for dismissing the various points of law cited by the plaintiffs (other than that he did not find their witnesses credible – a laughable assertion given each of their substantial credentials), and making no mention of the original intent of the founders in establishing this high bar for anyone seeking to become “the Command in Chief of the American Army.”  And what was their (Jay’s) stated reason?

“…to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government.”

Yet with the stroke of a pen, Judge Malihi wipes out any elevated requirement for becoming the possessor of the nuclear launch codes, and the Leader of the Free World, by declaring anyone born in the country, regardless of the citizenship of his parents, a “natural-born citizen.” 

In doing so, he wilfully ignores (or, if ignorantly, it is flagrantly inexcusable) the firmly established definition of a “natural-born citizen,”  by Emerich de Vattel, author of Law of Nations, about which Convention sage, Benjamon Franklin, said the following:

“It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult [it].   Accordingly, that copy which I kept has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress [the Constitutional Convention].” 

And what, exactly, did Vattel have to say about “natural-born citizens” and the citizenship of their parents?

“…natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”

But wait, it gets even better , or more clear:

“I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen;  for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

So, not only does Vattel define “natural-born citizen” beyond any conceivable dispute, but he explicitly gives his inarguable reasons – the very same reasons for which Jay made the recommendation in the first place.  While there are clearly those who wish to disregard both this obvious clarification, and the reasoning behind it – in other words, they are completely fine with allowing our country to be led (and ruled!) by one with possible foreign allegiances or loyalties – it is abundantly clear to anyone not blinded by loyalty to a particular party or candidate, that such a provision is both reasonable and essential to our safety as a nation…which, of course, is why such preeminent patriots as  John Jay, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin, saw to it that the requirement was codified in the Supreme Law of the Land, where it remains to this day – while not only the entire Democratic Party seek first to ignore, then to discredit it, but virtually the entire Republican, even “Conservative” establishment as well. 

Were their cowardice and abdication of duty (as well as whatever powers of reason they may have once possessed) their only transgressions, they might not have divested themselves of every trace of dignity; but in a vain attempt to assuage their guilt they have sought to savage anyone not so obsequious or dispossessed of reason as themselves. 

In the process of so doing, they have suffered the inevitable consequence unhappily inherited by all who seek to compromise the truth in order, as they suppose, to save their “reputations.”  They end up devoid of not only the truth itself, but of the ability to reason… AND without reputation among those who could ever really matter – those unwilling, at any cost, to compromise their own integrity in like manner!

The fruits of such compromise, while offering the illusion, at least, of temporary relief, are bitter indeed in the long run, for “what will a man give in exchange for his own soul?” or for the ability to look himself or others in the eye?

In the end, nothing is worth such a terrible price!