The National Society of Natural-Born Citizens of the United States


     The foremost purpose of this Society is to educate citizens of the United States with a better understanding of our Constitution.  The Constitution is above all other laws in the United States, enacted either by State Legislature or Federal Legislature.  It is the organic law from which all other laws obtain their authority in the United States.   


     This is the first point that needs to be recognized.  There is a distinction between laws enacted by the States which derived from English common law, and the law enacted under the Constitution that established the Federal Government.   It is the most common mistake and shows the lack of understanding for the Constitution and law, by writers both young and old, from Mr. William Han to Mr. Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service, that support a political legal theory based on English common law rather than the Constitution. 


    The result is a situation whereby a person can be tried twice for the same offence; once under State enacted law and again  under  Federally enacted law.  This is in spite of the Fifth Amendment that states; "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;"  A person is a citizen of a State under State law and also holds citizenship in the United States under the Constitution. 


     Law is supposed to reflect the political correctness of  the period which is why the men who wrote the Constitution created a method to amend the  Constitution to meet the requirements of the period.  The Constitution does not change because of political correctness, it is amended to reflect that political correctness.  In the absence of an Amendment, the Constitution remains the same supreme law of the land the writers intended it be. 


     The Constitution is a contract between the people of the United States and the Members of the Government the Constitution established.  The Members of Congress are responsible for carrying out the instructions established in the Constitution for a House of Representatives and a Senate.  


     The Senate is to be composed of  two Members  from each State, originally selected by the State Legislature.  When the age came that it became politically correct for the people of a State to elect their Senators, the Seventeenth Amendment, ratified April 8, 1913, was required to enact the law to modify the Constitution.  Political correctness did not enable Congress to dictate such a change.  The law of a Constitutional Amendment was necessary. 


     The House of Representatives is to be composed of Members from the States at a ratio of one Representative for every 30,000 citizen inhabitants.  Congress passed an Article on September 25, 1789, that would have changed that fixed ratio established in the Constitution.  This Article was included with eleven other Articles to establish additional rights for the people of the United States.  Ten Articles were ratified by the required number of States on December 15, 1791, and became the first Ten Amendments or the Bill of Rights.  One Article became the Twenty Seventh Amendment on May 7, 1992.   


     The Article that would have changed the representation ratio from one for every 30,000 has never been ratified.  In the absence of an Amendment, Congress is not a Constitutionally established body and any law enacted is unconstitutional.  Every person tried under a Federal law should argue in their defense that the law was enacted by an illegal body not meeting Constitutional requirements.  With numerous appeals to the Supreme Court, the Court should hear and force the issue to correct the representation in the House.   


     When bondage by slavery of people of the Ethiopian or African Race was no longer politically correct, Congress passed the Thirteen Amendment for ratification by the people who did so on December 6, 1865.  It was necessary to change the Constitution from permitting slavery in the United States to ending that abomination. 


     When States denied the privilege of suffrage for men of the newly enacted class of naturalized citizens established under the Fourteenth Amendment ratified July 9, 1868, Congress was required by political correctness to pass the Fifteenth Amendment for ratification by the people on February 3, 1870, to provide the law to the naturalized men and grant them the privilege of suffrage.  Members of the American Indian Race continued to be denied the privilege of citizenship in the United States under the Fourteenth Amendment.   Women were still not provided the law for the privilege of suffrage under the citizenship designated to women. 


     When the age came that political  correctness  required Congress to provide the law necessary to enable women, regardless of Race, with the privilege of suffrage, the Nineteenth Amendment, ratified August 18, 1920, was necessary to provide that law.  Only at that time did women obtain the law providing their citizenship the privilege of suffrage.  Women did not have the inalienable right of suffrage until 1920.  Women are not included in the definition of "natural born citizen" required to be eligible to hold the Office of President.   


     When the political correctness of a misguided group of activist women forced Congress to pass an Article to prohibit the sale of alcoholic spirits in the United States, the Eighteenth Amendment was ratified January 16, 1919.  And when political correctness was shown to be defective, the Twenty-First Amendment repealed the Eighteenth Amendment on December 5, 1933.


     When the United States was engaged in the Vietnam War, and the eighteen year old drafted soldiers demanded the right to vote, Congress passed an Article that became the Twenty-Sixth Amendment when ratified July 1, 1971.  It had been politically correct in Revolutionary times when fifteen year old and younger boys fought as men and did not have a right to vote.  Political correctness had changed again and necessitated a Constitutional Amendment. 


     The Eleventh Amendment, ratified February 7, 1795, can also be considered a result of political correctness.  The States, at that time, held they were independent States incapable of being sued by a person from another State.  The Supreme Court had ruled otherwise based on the Constitution.  The Constitution did not specify that a State could only be a plaintiff in a case and never a defendant.  The Supreme Court reasoned that if a State could be a plaintiff or a defendant in a case between two States, a State could likewise be either a plaintiff  or a defendant in a case between a State and a citizen of another State.  The States may have seen the logic, and still they demanded the right that they could not be sued by a citizen of another State prompting the Amendment.  


     Political correctness also played a major role in ratification of the Twenty-Third Amendment.  People born in the territory of the District of Columbia, where citizens at birth when born of citizen parents and were denied the privilege of suffrage in Federal elections.  The District was not a State and was prevented from electing Representatives to the House or the Senate.  The Amendment at least provided for those citizens to have input in the choice of Presidential candidates for elections and provide for Electors as though the District was a State.  Needless to say, people born in United States controlled territory  outside the continental United States were still denied citizenship and participation in Federal elections.  


     This policy of Congress was somewhat eased with the passage of the politically correct Twenty-Fourth Amendment ratified January 23, 1964.  This Amendment at least gives to citizens inhabitants of United States controlled territory the privilege of voting in primary elections without having to pay a poll tax or other tax that had been part of the Constitution.  


     The Constitution had left it up to the individual States to establish voting qualifications in Article I, section 2.  In order to take the qualification requirements out of the States' control, an Amendment was required to do that.  More Federal control and fewer States rights were the result. 


     The Sixteenth Amendment was necessary because a change in the Constitution was necessary for Congress to collect taxes directly from citizens of the United States.  Article I, section 9 is clear when it is stated that "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken."  The Sixteenth Amendment was ratified February 3, 1913 and allowed for direct taxation without regard to any census or enumeration.      


     The Amendments not already discussed are the Twelfth, Twentieth, Twenty-Second, and Twenty-Fifth.  These Amendments all reflect on the Presidency.


     The Twelfth lays out a procedure for the election of the President following the disasters of the election of 1796 and 1800.  Originally, Electors cast two votes for men selected by State voters.  The man with the most votes was President and the next most was to be Vice-President.  The Amendment required the Electors to cast one vote for a man for President and his other vote for the man to be Vice-President.  This Amendment was ratified June 15, 1804.


     The Twentieth Amendment is most interesting in that it contains seven sections.  First it proclaims that "The terms of the President and the Vice-President shall end at noon on the twentieth day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the third day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin."   


     The Twenty-Second, ratified February 27, 1951 was to prevent any man from continuing in office for more than two terms.  President Roosevelt had been President at the start of the Second World War and gave the argument that continuity could only be maintained by his continuing in office.  


     The Twenty-Fifth, ratified February 10, 1967 deals with Presidential succession and inability to continue to discharge the powers of office.  


     In the absence of an Amendment to the Constitution, the Races other than the members of the Race eligible for citizenship at the time the Constitution was written and ratified continue to be ineligible to the Office of President because they are not included in the Constitutional definition of "natural born citizen."


     In the absence of a Constitutional Amendment persons of the female gender continue to be ineligible to the Office of President because they are not included in the Constitutional definition of "natural born citizen."  


     In the absence of a ratified Constitutional Amendment that changes the ratio of Representation from one to 30,000 to some other ratio or figure, the Constitutional requirement remains in effect.


     Write your Representative and Senators to propose Articles to Amend the Constitution.