Posted on 09/20/2020 1:07:26 PM PDT by CDR Kerchner
(Sep. 19, 2020) — On Friday night the Twitter account @kamalakancel posted images of what it said were four documents appearing to show the immigration history of Shayamala Gopalan Harris, the mother of Democratic vice-presidential candidate and U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris.
To date, Kamala Harris has not responded to questions about her parents’ citizenship status when she was born in Oakland, CA on October 20, 1964 and, more broadly, whether or not she qualifies to serve as a “natural born Citizen.”
Some interpret the Article II, Section 1, clause 5 requirement for the president and commander-in-chief to signify a person born in the United States without respect to his parents’ citizenship, while others point to the different standard for the nation’s chief executive as opposed to that of “a Citizen” for U.S. senators and representatives set forth in Article I.
While the Constitution is silent on vice-presidential qualifications, the 12th Amendment, ratified June 15, 1804, states in its conclusion:
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States ... continue reading and see copies of newly obtained documents at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2020/09/19/do-these-documents-answer-questions-about-kamala-harriss-eligibility/
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
It seems to me that would be an argument in favor of excluding only "naturalized citizens".
That's kind of the point.
At least since the 14th was ratified one's parentage is irrelevant.
If you're born here and not a diplomat's kid you're an NBC.
And yet we do exclude "naturalized citizens" don't we? Does that keep you awake at night?
No, we are not a monarchy. We are a constitutional republic. The Constitution declares that only a "natural born citizen" is eligible. That excludes a lot of very worthy individuals. That is irrelevant.
Next you'll be telling me how unfair it is for California to have only two Senators for 30 million people.
Yes, for President we do.
Does that keep you awake at night?
Nope.
The Constitution declares that only a "natural born citizen" is eligible. That excludes a lot of very worthy individuals.
True, but if you're born here you're eligible regardless of who your parents are (unless they're foreign diplomats or soldiers).
Why "soldiers"?
Thanks to the collusion of Mexico and California, we will soon enough see an hispanic anchor baby President. I have a contractor re-siding my house. Most of the workers don't speak English. They aren't the ones trying to burn down Portland and defund the police. They're practical people who work hard and appreciate opportunity.
These workers also know nothing about overturning a monarchy and the safeguards necessary to avoid tyranny. When the free lunch is promised they may well buy into it.
Foreign soldiers who are stationed here or are occupying forces. Either way they aren’t subject to our jurisdiction so their kids don’t get 14th Amendment citizenship.
They're practical people who work hard and appreciate opportunity.
And it’s kind of hard to say their kids born here shouldn’t be able to fully participate in our society if they really embrace it.
Don’t forget, being eligible only buys you the ticket to the game. You still have to convince the people that you have the right stuff to represent America if you want to get elected.
“And Obama was elected President and served 8 years”
Just because murder happens everyday doesn’t mean it isn’t a crime
“History is full of the marriages among the royal families of Europe for the simple reason that people are reluctant to make war on their mother’s nephews”
That’s correct, and it’s also the reason the Natural Born Citizen clause exists.
The Founders were well aware of the practice among the European “aristocracy” and knew what disastrous effects it had on nations when they were governed by rulers with divided loyalties.
The Presidency is too important within our system to abandon it to someone with foreign strings tugging on them. Hoping that a mature, educated electorate will prevent that is something they sensibly tried to prevent. A clever demagogue - like Obama - will throw the mob candy and remove any reservations they might have.
And that’s how we got the Afro-Indonesian usurper who proceeded to turn the Federal Government into his personal gang operation, after he returned from his knee pads tour of the thugocracies of his extended family.
You are incorrect - Nothing in the Constitution defines natural born citizen and certainly not your requirement that both parents be citizens at the time of birth.
In fact, per the above cited clause, Congress has the sole and exclusive authority to define all rules of naturalization. That includes who is a citizen and birth and who needs to be naturalized (the only two categories of citizenship).
The current law confers citizenship to anyone born on US soil, per current interpretation of the 14th amendment and as expressed in SCOTUS rulings. If you disagree with that interpretation, elect those that will change the law to your liking.
True, but when all the LEOs stand by and treat a death as natural maybe it wasn't really murder to begin with.
From Minor v. Happersett:
"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first."
The de facto practice of calling such persons "citizens" may indeed have become not a homicide, but with such ambiguity still present, no sane person extends that to obviate the Presidential qualification.
We can tolerate little crimes at the fringes, but not when they affect the entire nation.
The Kenyan was not qualified, no matter where he was born.
Hardly. When you're the only one who sees a crime and all the experts see a natural death you may want to check your biases.
From Minor v. Happersett:
Right. The court didn't address the question because they didn't have to.
Since then we've had a President born of a non-citizen father elected and re-elected. The vast majority of the political and legal worlds have accepted the plain wording of the 14th and no one even raised a credible challenge.
Feel free to consider it a crime but understand what a fringe position you hold, and definitely don't expect arguments that haven't gotten traction in 230 years to suddenly carry the day.
Birthright citizenship might be a bad idea but until we amend the Constitution it's a fact of our lives.
What we do not know is if she is a Legal Anchor Baby or an Illegal Anchor Baby.
What we do know is she is not a Natural Born Citizen.
“When you’re the only one who sees a crime”
But I’m not...we have a President who ran on this issue just 4 short years ago and won.
We all know why Obama was let off the hook: he’s allegedly black. McCain threw the fight so we could show the world that racism in America had ended, and even a Noble Young Savage could be entrusted with the Nooklear Stockpile.
Uh Huh.
So they threw out all the constraints and looked the other way. Make a little room for the downtrodden, you know? Cut him some slack.
The same SOB who got Jack Ryan out of the Senate race by going after his divorce records and you tell me we can’t talk about his citizenship?!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2066926/posts
We have literally hundreds of millions of people who have no such disabilities for the Presidency. No reason to throw out the rule book for a some crazed opportunists seeking vengeance...like Kamala.
This didn’t work with Obama so not really sure why some are picking this hill to die on for gods sake.
what ???
Haven’t you heard of a candidate being “on the ballot” for a given State?
See, for example:
https://newsone.com/playlist/states-actually-letting-kanye-west-appear-on-ballot/item/11
Since ballots for every State have already been determined and printed, any “replacements” for Biden/Harris will not be on the ballot (without a lot of fast maneuvering, if possible). Those wishing to vote for the “replacements” would have to write them in!!!!
Completely false. There are plenty of illegal aliens in jail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.