"I assert that every man born within the limits of the Republic, or under its flag at sea, of parents who were not the subjects of any other sovereignty, are, in the very words of the Constitution, natural born citizens”
Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 407 (1862)
This will never go anywhere. Examining this will lead to examinations of other aspects of unconstitutional actions by our government and that’s the last thing the Deep State can have happen.
Hurry, go left 1 mile and it will be a natural born.
What is a unnatural citizen?
On page 12 the filing begins arguing there are three class of citizens, naturalized, "native born", and natural born citizens. It treats "native born" the same as naturalized and puts Harris in the "native born" class.
Under US law and case law, there are only two types of citizens, naturalized and natural born. There is no third class of "native born" citizens who are not natural born citizens and are legally treated as naturalized citizens, or any third classification citizen at all.
By claiming and arguing from a third class of American citizenship that does not exist this case will fail.
Waste of time.
OK here ya go everybody who believes in this. Let’s see what the courts do with it. My guess is they will throw the case out like they have all other such cases.
Is the 134 PAC being supported by the DNC or the ChiComs?
Even if she is a natural born citizen, she still doesn’t qualify. She isn’t qualified for anything, except maybe one, would have to ask Willie Brown.
I hope Trump & Vance avoid this issue. I have strong beliefs about this, but it is irrelevant and will only backfire on the Trump campaign.
Not helpful. The Courts have already made up their mind on this issue, and of course it is the sort of stupid decision that courts are good at.
Wouldn't surprise me if they were part of the local NBC group..
Maybe they're finally putting their money where their mouths are........LOL!
Supreme Court precedent: Throughout U.S. history, to the present day, the Supreme Court’s majority opinions have never used the term “natural born citizen” in reference to persons born in the United States, of a non-U.S.-citizen parent. Under some circumstances, such a person might be regarded as a citizen, but the Supreme Court has never regarded any such person as a natural born citizen. Whenever an Opinion of the Supreme Court referred to an individual as a “natural born citizen”, the individual was always born in the United States, of U.S.-citizen parents (see, for example, Perkins v. Elg and Kwock Jan Fat v. White).
In Inglis v. Trustees (1830) and Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court ruled that a child born on U.S. soil, to a father who owes allegiance to a sovereignty other than the United States, does not acquire U.S. citizenship at birth. Later in U.S. history, American policy would extend U.S. citizenship, at birth, to all U.S.-born children, regardless of their parents’ citizenship. Even though the criteria for citizenship at birth has evolved, it appears that natural born citizenship has a fixed meaning which does not change over time. If, at any time in U.S. history, the U.S.-born children of non-U.S.-citizen fathers were not U.S. citizens at birth, such children cannot be natural born citizens.
In Minor v. Happersett (1875), the Supreme Court defined two classes of children. The first class consists of children each of whom was born in a country, of parents who are citizens of that country. All other native-born chidren belong to the second class:
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. (Minor v. Happersett, 1875).
The Court used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to members of the first class. The Court doubted whether members of the second class were even citizens, let alone natural born citizens. Since a child acquires “natural born citizen” status only at birth, and since natural born citizens are “distinguished from” aliens or foreigners, it appears that natural born citizens are persons who, when born, are not alien or foreigner, i.e., are not citizens or subjects of any foreign country.
Bad idea. I doubt a single court at any level will agree with that.
It is a DEMOCRAT organization filing the suit.
Not going to gain anything.
The courts have ruled in favor of jus soli - Jus soli is a Latin phrase that means “right of the soil” and is a rule of law that determines a person’s nationality or citizenship based on their birthplace.
I’m ambivalent
Here we go. I said these legal challenges were waiting in the wings. Kammie is an anchor baby. Not an NBC.
"Lawsuit Filed In Texas Claiming Kamala Harris Is Not A Natural Born Citizen"
First, as a side note to this thread, consider that desperate Democrats panicked and declared Harris to be Democratic presidential nominee after OBiden did poorly in a debate with Trump. But this unilateral switcharoo with Harris by the Democratic elite is likely a HUGE constitutional problem imo.
More specifically, given the zero tolerance, "hair trigger" wording of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment (14A), that section a penalty for states where ballot box fraud has occurred, the votes of an official election, the primaries in this example, cannot be thrown out for any reason imo.
Excerpted from 14A:
"But when the right to vote at any election"
"is denied to any"
"or in any way abridged,"
"Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election [all emphases added] for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." [Apportionment of Representatives]
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
Pence and the J6 Congress wrongly ignored Section 2 with respect to allegations of vote-counting fraud in 2020 elections imo.
Getting back to controversies concerning natural born citizen (NBC), I'm glad to see this legal action by Texas. But I question if plaintiffs have the right argument.
More specifically, political correct controversy (smoke and mirrors) concerning NBC is based on the fact that the Constitution doesn't define NBC, although the Constitution references Law of Nations, international law at the time, which defines it.
The problem with NBC is that the corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties seem to be taking advantage of the fact that, since it is not defined in the Constitution, they take the liberty to define it according to political party needs.
H O W E V E R ...
The reality about NBC (imo) is that Chief Justice John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, had officially noted three categories of law that the USA is based on, the short list including Law of Nations shown by the excerpt below.
Excerpted from the writings of Chief Justice John Jay:
"That you may percieve more clearly the Extent and objects of your Inquiries, it may be proper to observe that the Laws of the united States admit of being classed under three Heads or3 Descriptions—"1st. all Treaties made under the authority of the united States.—John Jay’s Charge to the Grand Jury, the Circuit Court for the District of Virginia, 22 May 17932dly. The Laws of nations [emphasis added]—
3dly. The Constitution, and Statutes of the united States—"
So while corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification political parties who have pirated control of the federal government are acting stupid about that "mysterious" NBC in the Constitution, you and I may know more about it then lawmakers do.
On the other hand, the political parties may be scamming us with the “undefined” NBC.
The constitutionally reality is that, since worthless career federal lawmakers and renegade states have repeatedly proven that they are enemies of the people imo, it is now up to Democratic and Republican Trump supporters to effectively "impeach and remove" ALL (exceptions?) state and federal lawmakers and executives in November.
In other words, it's now up to Democratic and Republican Trump supporters to support hopeful Trump 47 with a new, Constitution-respecting Congress, new state lawmakers too, not only so that he will not be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will support him to quickly finish draining the swamp.
Finally, let's not allow the anti-Trump media try to fade our memories of what we witnessed on July 13.
Down the Memory Hole: Google Hides Autocomplete Suggestions Related to Trump Assassination Attempt (7.28.24)
“Are stupid republicans actively trying to lose this election?”
^
...or opening the door for an Elon Musk candidacy...?
“”I assert that every man born within the limits of the Republic, or under its flag at sea, of parents who were not the subjects of any other sovereignty, are, in the very words of the Constitution, natural born citizens””
What about women?
Her parents were each subjects of another sovereignty. Father: Jamaica; Mother: India.
That's why the "subject" word is in the 14th Amendment.
She isn't a natural born citizen. It isn't a difficult thing to figure out with her. Neither parent applied for citizenship until she was well into her teens.
Moreover, her mother left the USA and moved to Canada where Harris was raised during her formative years: 12-17 or so, I believe.
And to be honest, Harris isn't an American Black. She might claim to have Jamaican Black blood, but her experience was not as a black raised in the USA.