37 Stars
Posted on 04/07/2016 11:59:33 PM PDT by morphing libertarian
The resolution says he was born on base, but I have read a dozen times here that he was born in a hospital in the COUNTRY of Panama.
I would think that military or civilians serving the military overseas would be covered. If we voted on it it certainly would pass
Why did the senate need to pass a resolution?
you’re on fire
"MINOR V. HAPPERSETT IS BINDING PRECEDENT AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEFINITION OF A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN"
The independent ground the Court used to determine that Virginia Minor was a US citizen is stated as follows:
“Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that ‘No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution shall be eligible to the office of President,’ …This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that ‘No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution shall be eligible to the office of President,’ …
“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. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. ”
"Read that passage very carefully, and you will see that the US Supreme Court clearly defined “natural-born citizen” by two independent remarks:
1. “…all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also.” First, the Court states that these persons are “citizens”. But then it makes a second statement about this class –
2. “These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.” This class of citizens are part of a class defined as “natural-born citizens”. They are citizens, natural-born. This distinguishes them from all other citizens. If this were not the case, it would have been sufficient for the Court to stop at the first statement concerning their citizenship.
But the Court didn’t stop there. Because the Court was avoiding the 14th Amendment, the Court went to the second step and defined this class to be different from all other citizens. This class did not require the 14th Amendment to be US citizens.
Whether persons born in the US to non-citizen parents were “citizens” was not a question before the Minor Court because Mrs. Minor was natural-born, whereas Wong Kim Ark was not. The determination of his citizenship required the 14th Amendment, whereas Mrs. Minor’s did not.
It was held that Mrs. Minor was a US citizen – as the syllabus states in point 2 – because she was born in the US to parents who were citizens. This was the independent ground that springs forth precedent. (See Ogilvie Et Al., Minors v. United States, 519 U.S. 79 at 84 (1996))."
-----------*****----------
"But the Court in Minor did make a direct holding that Mrs. Minor was, in fact, a US citizen. The Court established her citizenship by defining the “class” of “natural-born citizens” as those born in the US to parents who were citizens. Then the Court included Virginia Minor in that class thereby deeming her to be a US citizen. And they did this by specifically avoiding the 14th Amendment and by specifically construing Article 2 Section 1."
In my limited capacity to understand constitutional law (capacity=0) it appears to me that this would eliminate Ted Cruz. I am a Cruz supporter. Will someone please explain.
The article seems pretty self-explanatory.
What more needs to be explained?
Wherein is your confusion?
What part of the of the U.S. State Department Foreign Affairs Manual did you fail to understand where it said the following?
U.S. Foreign Affairs Manual, 7 FAM 1110 ACQUISITION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH IN THE UNITED STATES. . . 7 FAM 1113 Not Included in the Meaning of “In the United States” . . . c. Birth on U.S. Military Base Outside of the United States or Birth on U.S. Embassy or Consulate Premises Abroad:
(1) Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities abroad are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not born in the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.
(2) The status of diplomatic and consular premises arises from the rules of law relating to immunity from the prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction of the receiving State; the premises are not part of the territory of the United States of America. (See Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law, Vol. 1, Sec. 466, Comment a and c (1987). See also, Persinger v. Iran, 729 F.2d 835 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
The Canal Zone was a U.S. possession and unincorporated territory that was deemed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Insular Cases to be outside the jurisdiction of the Constitution’s Article III Federal District Courts, and was instead subject to the Article IV territorial courts. This is why the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. State Department state the Canal Zone was not U.S. soil with regard to the establishment of U.S. citizenship, and the unincorporated territory has since been retroceded to the Republic of Panama. This also why the Republic of Panama continued to grant Panamanian citizenship to children born in the Canal Zone while the United States was in possession of the Canal Zone. John McCain was born with the right to claim Panamanian citizenship due to place of birth in addition to naturalized U.S. citizenship by right of blood relationship to two U.S. citizen parents.
“I would think that military or civilians serving the military overseas would be covered. If we voted on it it certainly would pass”
They could not due to the Constitution’s limitations upon the Article III Federal District Courts as set forth in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Insular Cases. See:
United States territorial court
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_territorial_court
Incorporated and unincorporated territories
Territories of the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territories_of_the_United_States
48 states when McCain was born
Definitely not. Obama resembles his half brothers. Obama was his bio father.
“More importantly, where was he not born. He was not born in any of the 48 united States. Neither was George Romney or Barry Goldwater.”
John McCain acquired U.S. citizenship by naturalization at birth due to his birth abroad with two U.S. citizen parents under the provisions of the U.S. naturalization act. John McCain was born either in the Colon Hospital, Colon, Republic of Panama as stated by the only purported birth certificate publicly available or at the U.S. Navy Hospital, Coco Solo naval Air Station, Canal Zone has privately claimed by John McCain. In either case, John McCain was born outside of the U.S. jurisdiction as determined by the sovereignty of the Republic of Panama or by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Insular Cases establishing the Territorial courts of the unincorporated possessions being the Constitution’s Article IV courts and not the required Article II courts.
George Romney may or may not have failed to acquire a lawful U.S. citizenship of any kind. George Romney was born in Mexico. His parents are alleged to have renounced their U.S. citizenship at the time they emigrated from the United States to Mexico, but their true citizenship status remains unknown. If his parents did renounce their U.S. citizenship as alleged, George Romney was born in Mexico with two parents who were not U.S. citizens, and there is no evidence available to indicate George Romney or his parents naturalized as U.S. citizens upon their return to the United States. If George Romney’s parents did not renounce or failed to successfully renounce their U.S. citizenship, then George Romney may have been eligible to claim U.S. naturalized U.S. citizenship. Under no circumstances whatsoever, however, is there any path or means by which George Romney could be a natural born citizen of the U.S., because his birth abroad in the foreign sovereign jurisdiction of Mexico was outside the jurisdiction of the United States.
Barry Goldwater was a natural born citizen of the United States. His father and mother were U.S. citizens at the time of his birth. He was born within the jurisdiction of the United States and the Constitution’s Article III courts in the organized Territory of Arizona.
That doesn’t change the fact that neither McCain, George Romney or Barry Goldwater were born in any US State.
37 Stars
“That doesn’t change the fact that neither McCain, George Romney or Barry Goldwater were born in any US State.”
That doesn’t change the fact States and organized Territories are within the Constitution’s Article III jurisdiction and qualified any child born therein with two U.S. citizen parents as a natural born citizen of the United States as observed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Totally unrelated to the issue at hand.
and qualified any child born therein with two U.S. citizen parents as a natural born citizen of the United States as observed by the U.S. Supreme Court
Got a link for that?
“Totally unrelated to the issue at hand.”
If the issue at hand is the fact John McCain III was not born in the jurisdiction of one of the fifty of the United States, it is significant to the Presidential eligibility issue only to the extent McCain was also not born within the jurisdiction of an Article III Federal District Court in an organized U.S. Territory. In any case, whether John McCain was born in a foreign state or within an unorganized U.S. Possession such as the Canal Zone, he acquired U.S. citizenship only through naturalization as a naturalized U.S. citizen.
“Got a link for that?”
See Post #90
There weren’t 48 states when Barry Goldwater was born.
:)
He's not on the ticket yet and there's a really good chance he won't be even if he manages to push us into a contested convention. It bothers me that Obama is in the WH and it bothers me that we may very well pass up a golden opportunity and put Hillary in the WH - that's what matters to me, not the endless arguments about eligibility when we all know that they don't mean a damn thing anymore because they cause a lot of argument but no legal redress has/will occur.
This is a map of the Panama Canal Treat affected area per the 1903 agreement:
http://qalabist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/panama-canal-1.jpg
There is one small area at the top edge of the Poco Solo peninsula which stayed within Panama authority. The rest, by the 1903 treaty was US sovereign territory (as deemed by the Hay-Banau-Varilla Treaty of 1903).
By signing Article III of the treaty, the entire Canal Zone was US sovereign territory, and was to be treated as such. Treaties that came later...undid portions of Article III, but all of these came after 1945. By the discretion of Panama, the US had all rights, power, and authority over the Canal Zone area.
The map on the Colon corridor doesn’t help because it’s related to the 1970s upgraded treaty and not the 1903 treaty.
As for the location of the pre-1941 Colon hospital and the 1941 concrete and upgraded hospital...I’ve never seen the pre-1941 location given.
The one curious piece of the Colon hospital is that it’s actually connected to an executive order (8981, given by FDR). See: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=60931
FDR identifies the site as not only a Naval site, but also a Canal Zone site. Course, this only settles hospital number II....not the original hospital.
Truth is my first priority. You don’t wait for the convention to determine if someone is eligible. It should be done when the primaries start and someone declares themselves a candidate. Instead of vetting the candidates the parties (both) ignore the issue and we wind up with an unveiled Obama and now Cruz who is trying to sweep it under the rug.
IMO Cruz is not an NBC by virtue of Canadian birth. That’s why the congress scurried to try to make Mccain legitimate. The same people are in the senate now who passed the McCain resolution. So Cruz is in jeopardy and a risky pick. The good news is the supremes will go into cress till October and Cruz will skate. But hold your breath come October if he is the candidate.
I re-read your comments about Obama and I was bothered by him since he announced. As for the current dem frontrunner, she is a career criminal, sociopathic liar, and a despicable human being. So be ready to hold your nose and pray for the next 8 years.
Can’t argue with a word you said.
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.
