Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Bobby Jindal Eligible To Become President If He Was Born Before Parents Were Naturalized?

Posted on 11/12/2010 4:53:42 PM PST by Retired Intelligence Officer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 1,321-1,339 next last
To: devere

“Based on the original historical meaning of ‘natural born citizen’, someone born to a foreign citizen on US soil probably does not qualify to serve as POTUS.”

Whether or not that’s true, after the 14th amendment it’s moot point.


101 posted on 11/12/2010 5:51:44 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,

So, if a diplomat has a child in the US, the child is not citizen, since their parent is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Also, anyone illegally entering the US is in violation of the jurisdiction, and therefore should not be a citizen. Also, this does not state that they are NBC, but just citizen. And yes, there is a difference, otherwise, why the reference in Article 1, Section 8?

102 posted on 11/12/2010 5:52:39 PM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Well, that’s part of rationale for De Vattel’s construction of “natural born” — the presumption of loyalty of those born in nation to those who are citizens, and the presumption of some animus, divided loyalty or even animosity of those whose parents were not citizens. In the case of black slaves, admittedly, it’s a not a bright line call. Were they really citizens prior to the 14th, or not? Dredd Scott — never reversed — says they were even fully HUMAN. A terrible ruling. It should be reversed by Court declaration.

Yet among many other deficiencies of the 14th is that it did not clarify the citizenship status pf black slaves before the 14th was enacted.


103 posted on 11/12/2010 5:52:49 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: LiberConservative

“He was born here in the US. He is a US Citizen. I would love to deny citizenship to children born here by illegals but I can’t change the rules.”

Jindal’s parents were legal.


104 posted on 11/12/2010 5:52:49 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: devere
"Based on the original historical meaning of “natural born citizen”, someone born to a foreign citizen on US soil probably does not qualify to serve as POTUS.

The fact that Jindal’s parents were resident aliens who intended on becoming US citizens would probably allow Congress to remove the disability by statute or resolution."

Congress cannot amend the Constitution by statute or resolution. You'd need three quarters of the state legislatures to ratify. Not going to happen.

105 posted on 11/12/2010 5:53:58 PM PST by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: battletank

There are only two types of US citizen - natural-born and naturalized. If you are a US citizen, you are either:
1) A citizen from birth, aka natural-born citizen
2) A naturalized citizen (via immigration process)
Everyone in category #1 is eligible to be President.

As per the 14th amendment, Jindhal is in #1. Thus he is eligible to be President.

There is no need for a complex falsehood when the truth is simple and clear.


106 posted on 11/12/2010 5:55:01 PM PST by WOSG (OPERATION RESTORE AMERICAN FREEDOM - NOVEMBER, 2010 - DO YOUR PART!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: battletank

“Running for PRESIDENT goes far and above being a citizen. He must be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN which has stricter requirements than just being a citizen.”

Yes, there is a level of citizenship beyond citizenship pure and simple. It is called being born a citizen—or natural born citizenship—as opposed to being naturalized.


107 posted on 11/12/2010 5:55:20 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

How can they be legal when they weren’t naturalized yet? Also what is the difference between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen?


108 posted on 11/12/2010 5:55:33 PM PST by Retired Intelligence Officer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding

The question in Wong Kim Ark wasn’t if they were natural born citizens. They weren’t asked that. It remains something undecided by the SC. I don’t see the SC ruling that either Obama or Jindal are ineligible.


109 posted on 11/12/2010 5:55:33 PM PST by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding

The question in Wong Kim Ark wasn’t if they were natural born citizens. They weren’t asked that. It remains something undecided by the SC. I don’t see the SC ruling that either Obama or Jindal are ineligible.


110 posted on 11/12/2010 5:55:38 PM PST by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
Neither of those reasons matter, actually.

If you look at the 14th Amendment and what the authors said, i.e. that the amendment was NOT going to grant citizenship to US born children of illegal aliens, then it does matter.

111 posted on 11/12/2010 5:55:50 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Retired Intelligence Officer

Much as I like Bobby Jindal and think he would be good for the country I hope that he is, in fact, ruled ineligible. He is one of the best we have but he should not be granted the status of a Natural Born Citizen if his parents were not citizens when he was born.


112 posted on 11/12/2010 5:56:50 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: battletank

“And what part of CITIZEN vs. NATURAL BORN CITIZEN don’t YOU get??”

What I don’t get is what this distinction is supposed to do with born citizens and natural born citizens, who are to my mind (and U.S. law) the same.


113 posted on 11/12/2010 5:57:03 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

It hasn’t been argued and decided. Womg King Ark is a trump, like Miller is in gun law.


114 posted on 11/12/2010 5:57:27 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

Okay, so where does that put me: Born in a United States Army Hospital, Korea to Parents who were both American Citizens.


115 posted on 11/12/2010 5:57:44 PM PST by seoul62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: YellowRoseofTx

“Yes, there is. Do some research. There is a big difference.”

No, there isn’t. Do some research. There is no difference.


116 posted on 11/12/2010 5:58:01 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

“Whether or not that’s true, after the 14th amendment it’s moot point.”

That’s open to debate.
http://www.birthers.org/USC/14.html


117 posted on 11/12/2010 5:59:26 PM PST by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Will you please answer my question Tublecane? What is the difference between Natural Born Citizen and Citizen?


118 posted on 11/12/2010 6:00:48 PM PST by Retired Intelligence Officer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
Yes, and some still don’t get how simple reality is. If you are a US citizen, you are either: 1) A citizen from birth, aka natural-born citizen 2) A naturalized citizen (via immigration process) Everyone in category #1 is eligible to be President.

As per the 14th amendment, Jindhal is in #1. Thus he is eligible to be President.

Again, being born here does make one a "citizen", but not necessarily a "natural born citizen", that require both parents being citizens (either born here or naturalized) before the baby is natural born citizen.

And again, per the 14th amendment, Jinhal is not in #1 and is not eligible because his parents were not citizens at the time of his birth.

119 posted on 11/12/2010 6:00:50 PM PST by YellowRoseofTx (Evil is not the opposite of God; it's the absence of God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: YellowRoseofTx

“That isn’t what ‘under the jurisdiction’ means.”

Are you telling me legal aliens aren’t under the jurisdiction of U.S. law? Or is it that the phrase as it appears in the 14th amendment means something different than what a knowledge of law and English would lead one to believe it means? Was it written in code?


120 posted on 11/12/2010 6:00:53 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 1,321-1,339 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson