US National born Tulsi Gabbard is not eligible to be president of the US

various ^ | 6-29-2019 | self

[morphing libertarian]

If you are born in Guam or Puerto Rico, you are automatically granted citizenship. If you are born in American Samoa, that isn't the case. Despite American Samoa's status as a U.S. territory, the people who are born there aren't technically U.S. citizens. They're called U.S. nationals, a status that means they pay American taxes but cannot vote, run for office, or serve on a jury. They also have special passports that declare them nationals, but not U.S. citizens.

[Yosemitest]

Funny.
I read that book while daubing my first of give tours in South Korea, while at Osan in '86.
But I don't remember that.

Again, I refer people back to the LAW written at the time of Tulsi Gabbard's birth.

From the biased and unreliable source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsi_Gabbard :

" ... Gabbard was born on April 12, 1981, in Leloaloa, Maoputasi County, on American Samoa's main island of Tutuila.[3] She was ... born to Carol (née Porter) and Mike Gabbard. In 1983, when Gabbard was two years old, her family moved to Hawaii. ...

Her father is of Samoan and European ancestry and an active lector at his Catholic church. Her mother, who was born in Decatur, Indiana, is of German descent and a practicing Hindu. ... "

Now there is a very important FACT in the link about her father, Mike Gabbard.

" ... Mike, one of eight children, was born in 1948 in Fagatogo, American Samoa.
He was a U.S. citizen from birth because of his dad’s U.S citizenship. ... "

Now let's review what we know:

• 1. Tulsi Gabbard's father, IS a "U.S. citizen from birth because of his dad’s U.S citizenship."
  
  
• 2. Tulsi Gabbard's mother "who was born in Decatur, Indiana" IS a U.S. citizen from birth .

So, where is the LAW and WHAT does it say ?

Chapter 3 - United States Citizens at Birth (INA 301 and 309)

Appendix: Children Born Outside the United States in Wedlock (Nationality Chart 1)
STEP 1: Determine period in which child was born

On or After Dec. 24, 1952 and Prior To Nov. 14, 1986 :

STEP 2: Determine parents’ citizenship at time of child’s birth

Both parents USCs :

STEP 3: Did U.S. citizen (USC) parent meet residence or physical presence requirement prior to birth ? (If yes, child was a USC at birth)

At least one USC parent resided in the United States or OLP

STEP 4: Did child meet retention requirement (if any)? (Child lost citizenship on date it became impossible to meet requirement)

Not Applicable

TITLE 8 / CHAPTER 12 / SUBCHAPTER III / Part I / § 1401 is the law governing this situation.

YOU SEE ?

... MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT HER FATHER, Mike Gabbard, WAS A U.S. CITIZEN FROM BIRTH .

SO ... the fact that Tulsi Gabbard was born on American Samoa ... has NO bearing on her citizenship.


NOW ... Read this:

Constitutional Topic: Citizenship

... Citizenship is mentioned in
Article 1, Section 2,
Article 1, Section 3,
Article 1, Section 8,
Article 2, Section 1,
and in the 14th Amendment
and several subsequent amendments.

If you're going to be involved in government in the United States, citizenship is a must.
To be a Senator or Representative, you must be a citizen of the United States.
To be President, not only must you be a citizen, but you must also be natural-born.
Aside from participation in government, citizenship is an honor bestowed upon people by the citizenry of the United States when a non-citizen passes the required tests and submits to an oath.

Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen?
Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States,
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
But even this does not get specific enough.
As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.
The Constitution authorizes the Congress to do create clarifying legislation in
Section 5 of the 14th Amendment;
the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4,
also allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization,

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution.
Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"


• Anyone born inside the United States *
  * There is an exception in the law - - the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.
  This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
• Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
  
• Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
  
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
  
• Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
  
• Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
  
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
  A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President.
These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.

Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such as
Puerto Rico (8 USC 1402),
Alaska (8 USC 1404),
Hawaii (8 USC 1405),
the U.S. Virgin Islands (8 USC 1406),
and Guam (8 USC 1407).
Each of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date,
and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date.
For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952).
Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States.
Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.

The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama.
In 8 USC 1403, the law states that
anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen,
was "declared" to be a United States citizen.
Note that the terms "natural-born" or "citizen at birth" are missing from this section.

In 2008, when Arizona Senator John McCain ran for president on the Republican ticket, some theorized that
because McCain was born in the Canal Zone,
he was not actually qualified to be president.
However, it should be noted that section 1403 was written to apply to a small group of people to whom section 1401 did not apply.
McCain is a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c):
"a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States
and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person."
Not everyone agrees that this section includes McCain - - but absent a court ruling either way, we must presume citizenship.

U.S. Nationals

A "national" is a person who is considered under the legal protection of a country, while not necessarily a citizen.
National status is generally conferred on persons who lived in places acquired by the U.S. before the date of acquisition.
A person can be a national-at-birth under a similar set of rules for a natural-born citizen.
U.S. nationals must go through the same processes as an immigrant to become a full citizen.
U.S. nationals who become citizens are not considered natural-born.

(Continued

[Yosemitest]

Read my comment #101 about HOW the LAW applies to DemocRAT Tulsi Gabbard.

[morphing libertarian]

I think
ww morved past the parents citizenship a few posts back. Now we have the “she wasn’t born in the US” issue. But that is even more problematic If she is a citizen and her parents are it seems she’s a NBC unlike harris.

[morphing libertarian]

We moved

[DMZFrank]

Many of the issues in your reply are seemingly a conflation of BORN a citizen via various statutory mechacnisms (such as Gabbard by way of the Immigration and Naturalization Act) and being a NATURAL Born Citizen, as having no other possible citizenship with no other sovereignty having a claim on your allegiance, i.e born of two citizen parents in a state of the US.

Additionally, the framers were concerned of undue foreign influence on the office of the presidency. They were desirous of parents who were either natural born or who had taken an oath of allegiance by naturalization. The dual requirement of citizen parents and soil birth wouuld minimize that likelihood of undue foreign influencee, PARTICULARLY from a father who owed an allegiance to a foreign entiity. The founders were patriarchs, and beleived that the citizenship of the father was the citizenship of the childrenn.

The authors of the 14th amendment, in the Congressional debates on the matter, also defined an NBC in the same manner. Rep. Bimgham and Senator Jacob Howard were the principal authors of the 14th amendment. Here is a quote from Howard which clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment in 1866, which was to define citizenship. He stated: “Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”

Notice that they did not use the term natural born citizen for persons born under 14th amendment provisions at the time it was ratified.

Ther 14th amendment, ratified in 1868, did not alter or modify the meaning of NBC in any way from it’s inception in 1787.

John McCain too was a citizen by statute owing to his birth to two citizen parents in Colon Hospital in Panama City, Panama. He was NOT Article II eligible.

[Windflier]

A child born to a US Citizen anywhere in the world is a US citizen.

Sure, such people are 'citizens', just not 'natural born citizens', which requires two things:

Born on US soil, to two US citizen parents.

[Yosemitest]

John McCain too was a citizen by statute owing to his birth to two citizen parents in Colon Hospital in Panama City, Panama.
He was NOT Article II eligible.

WRONG !

[Yosemitest]

It took me a serious about of time to research and format comment #101.
I can't build that kind of 'researched comment' while, at the same time, keeping up with what's being posted to the article.

[Yosemitest]

In reference to "John McCain ... was NOT Article II eligible." :

Here's the supporting article from Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow in constitutional studies and editor-in-chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review.
Like most immigrants, he does a job Americans won't: defending the Constitution.

Yes, Ted Cruz Can be President
August 26, 2013., by Ilya Shapiro

As we head into a potential government shutdown over the funding of Obamacare, the iconoclastic junior senator from Texas - - love him or hate him - - continues to stride across the national stage.
With his presidential aspirations as big as everything in his home state, by now many know what has never been a secret:
Ted Cruz was born in Canada.

(Full disclosure: I'm Canadian myself, with a green card.
Also, Cruz has been a friend since his days representing Texas before the Supreme Court.)

But does that mean that Cruz's presidential ambitions are gummed up with maple syrup
or stuck in snowdrifts altogether different from those plaguing the Iowa caucuses?
Are the birthers now hoist on their own petards,
having been unable to find any proof that President Obama was born outside the United States
but forcing their comrade-in-boots to disqualify himself by releasing his Alberta birth certificate?

No, actually, and it's not even that complicated; you just have to look up the right law.
It boils down to whether Cruz is a "natural born citizen" of the United States,
the only class of people constitutionally eligible for the presidency.
(The Founding Fathers didn't want their newly independent nation to be taken over by foreigners on the sly.)

What's a "natural born citizen" ?
The Constitution doesn't say,
but the Framers' understanding, combined with statutes enacted by the First Congress, indicate that
the phrase means both birth abroad to American parents - - in a manner regulated by federal law - -
and birth within the nation's territory regardless of parental citizenship.
The Supreme Court
has confirmed that definition
on multiple occasions
in various contexts.

There's no ideological debate here:
Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe and former solicitor general Ted Olson - -
who were on opposite sides in Bush v. Gore among other cases
- - co-authored a memorandum in March 2008 detailing the above legal explanation in the context of John McCain's eligibility.
Recall that McCain --
lately one of Cruz's chief antagonists
- - was born to U.S. citizen parents serving on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone.

In other words, anyone who is a citizen at birth - -
as opposed to someone who becomes a citizen later ("naturalizes"
or who isn't a citizen at all
- - can be president.

So the one remaining question is
whether Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth.
That's an easy one.
The Nationality Act of 1940 outlines which children become "nationals and citizens of the United States at birth."
In addition to those who are born in the United States or born outside the country to parents who were both citizens - -
or, interestingly, found in the United States without parents and no proof of birth elsewhere - -
citizenship goes to babies born to one American parent who has spent a certain number of years here.

That single-parent requirement has been amended several times, but under the law in effect between 1952 and 1986 - - Cruz was born in 1970 - -
someone must have a citizen parent who resided in the United States for at least 10 years,
including five after the age of 14, in order to be considered a natural-born citizen.
Cruz's mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware, lived most of her life in the United States, and gave birth to little Rafael Edward Cruz in her 30s. Q.E.D.

So why all the brouhaha about where Obama was born, given that there's no dispute that his mother, Ann Dunham, was a citizen?
Because his mother was 18 when she gave birth to the future president in 1961
and so couldn't have met the 5-year-post-age-14 residency requirement.
Had Obama been born a year later, it wouldn't have mattered whether that birth took place in
Hawaii,
Kenya,
Indonesia,
or anywhere else.
(For those born since 1986, by the way,
the single citizen parent must have only resided here for five years,
at least two of which must be after the age of 14.)

In short, it may be politically advantageous for Ted Cruz to renounce his Canadian citizenship before making a run at the White House,
but his eligibility for that office shouldn't be in doubt.
As Tribe and Olson said about McCain - -
and could've said about
Obama,
or the Mexico-born George Romney,
or the Arizona-territory-born Barry Goldwater
- - Cruz "is certainly NOT the hypothetical 'foreigner'
who John Jay and George Washington were concerned might usurp the role of Commander in Chief."

[Redmen4ever]

With regard to McCain, no state Secretary of State or other election officer declined to put his name on the ballot. There were three law suits by Birthers against putting his name on the ballot. With election officers, Birthers were. oh for 90 (51 jurisdictions in the general, and 39 primaries). The Birthers struck out that year. in court, oh for three. The Birthers have a perfect record. No judge has ever agreed with them. No election officer has ever agreed with them. Over the years, Birthers are about oh for a thousand.

[Redmen4ever]

Winston Churchill joked about being U.S. President in his speech to Congress. My father was English, my mother American. If it had been the other way around, I would be addressing you as President instead of as Prime Minister. That was not a legal opinion. If he had ever run for President, an election officer would have to decide whether to place his name on the ballot. And, his decision - which ever way - could have been appealed to a court of law. Over the years, we have had something like 1,000 decisions by election officers and judges concerning persons whose citizenship at birth rested on only one or two of the following three criteria (lineage by mother, lineage by father, or place of birth). They are unanimous.

[Redmen4ever]

With regard to the Congressional resolution concerning McCain, this was instigated by Democrats in Congress. Whenever Birtherism works to their advantage, Democrats bring it up. In 2016, both the New York Times and the Washington Post ran op eds questioning whether Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz were natural born citizens. When Democrats do this, it’s just “good politics.” When people on our side do this, it “racist.” No. There are genuine concerns for loyalty, and the possibility that “natural born citizen” means something different from “citizen at birth” (that had been long resolved). Although there are no guarantees, a natural born citizen is more inclined to love this country. Just look at the hate for this country by the two Muslim immigrants in the U.S. Congress. But, a lot of natural born citizen Democrats also hate this country nowadays. Think of Bernie Sanders. He went on his honeymoon to the Soviet Union. What does that tell you?

[PIF]

[Redmen4ever]

Ted Cruz finished with the second highest number of state wins, second highest in popular votes, and second highest in delegates. This means he lost. Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. Birthers have lost every time. Every time an election officer considered putting the name of a person whose natural born citizenship was questioned, and every time that decision was challenged in court.

Regarding flip-flopping on Cruz’ eligibility, in the first Republican debate of the 2016 election cycle, Trump said that both Cruz and Rubio were eligible. After Cruz won Iowa, Trump said Rubio was, but questioned whether Cruz was. By the way, I don’t think Trump ever actually said Cruz was ineligible, or Obama for that matter, but merely questioned their eligibility.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

I sense that our side is getting nervous that she could win, which is why we’re seeing these arguments.

[Chickensoup]

Unfortunatly that argument left the barn about 14 years ago.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

Our side needs to get the memo. Unless we can conclusively prove someone is ineligible, we need to stay on message.

[morphing libertarian]

I just want a constitutional election When Obama ran, i wrote to the secretary of state in CAL a democrat and asked her to review a copy of his birth certificate given the persistent stories he was born in Kenya. She didn’t respond to me

When Eldridge Cleever ran, the sec of state in CAL asked for his birth certificate and he was too young to run and thus left off the ballot. I think he was Peace and Freedom Party nominee.

[morphing libertarian]

I would add Obama with a Kenyan/Brit father who hated the US because we were a “colonial” power since 1948 in his mind. He set about to weaken us in the world and diminish our influence, especially in the middle east. And he hated Great Britain “the oppressor” of Kenya and so many other places.

[morphing libertarian]

I think the only issue open on her is, she wasn’t born in the states.

Her father is said to be a US citizen but it doesn’t say anything about where he was born. It says Samoan ancestry. I’m saying he was a US citizen when she was born till i find otherwise.