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.
“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.