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

To: captain_dave

Yes, she had citizenship at birth and it cannot be taken from her against her will.

https://reason.com/2020/08/10/yes-kamala-harris-is-indeed-a-natural-born-citizen/


5 posted on 08/11/2020 7:36:50 PM PDT by GreenLanternCorps (Hi! I'm the Dread Pirate Roberts! (TM) Atsk about franchise opportunities in your area.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: GreenLanternCorps
Citizenship at birth is NOT the same as being a natural born citizen.
22 posted on 08/11/2020 7:54:18 PM PDT by Governor Dinwiddie (Guide me, O thou great redeemer, pilgrim through this barren land.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: GreenLanternCorps
Citizenship at birth is NOT the same as being a natural born citizen.
23 posted on 08/11/2020 7:54:18 PM PDT by Governor Dinwiddie (Guide me, O thou great redeemer, pilgrim through this barren land.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: GreenLanternCorps

She’s not a natural born citizen. It’s actually only customary to even consider her a 14th Amendment citizen - both parents were here on student visas at the time.

Treating the children of temporary visitors as citizens is absurd.

no nation except the US does that, and never used to until the State department unilaterally decided to treat a birth certificate as the only criteria.

She’s not just not a natural born citizen, she’s not even supposed to have a passport.


24 posted on 08/11/2020 7:54:42 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: GreenLanternCorps

Mmmmm no. She is a citizn of Jamaica according to their law. Here is a snippet from The Federalist:

But not so fast. Harris is constitutionally ineligible to be VPOTUS (12th Amendment) or POTUS (Article 2). She is not — nor can she ever be — a natural born citizen, the highest standard of citizenship mandated by the Constitution for the president and commander-in-chief. The Founding Fathers wanted a higher standard of citizenship for the POTUS because they did not want any competing allegiances with foreign governments.

Harris was born in Oakland, California on October 20, 1964, to an Indian citizen mother and a Jamaican citizen father. Thus, Harris is a native-born American citizen, or a citizen pursuant to what I refer to as the anchor baby provision of the 14th Amendment.

I wrote to Senator Harris on Dec. 4, 2017, expressing that the presidential eligibility clause, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 mandates that the president must be a natural born citizen. She and her campaign replied with a form letter that purposely ignored the issue.

But wait, there is more! Harris may be a native-born American citizen by the accident of her birth and in my opinion an erroneous 14th Amendment interpretation, but she is also a citizen of Jamaica.

Under Chapter 2 of the Constitution of Jamaica, a person born in Jamaica after August 5, 1962, or born outside Jamaica after that date to a parent who is a Jamaican citizen, is automatically considered a Jamaican citizen at birth. Furthermore, under current Jamaican legislation, citizens of Jamaica can hold multiple nationalities. And this status does not prohibit serving in the legislature of Jamaica!

Imagine that: a vice president or president of the United States with concurrent citizenship with another foreign government — a person with clearly divided loyalties and an ability and opportunity to participate in governmental proceedings of another country, travel on another country’s passport, and legally take up residence in that country.

Specifically, Chapter 2 (entitled Citizenship) of the Jamaica Constitution, Section 3C states:

Every person born outside Jamaica shall become a citizen of Jamaica -
on the sixth day of August 1962, in the case of a person born before that date; or on the date of his/her birth, in the case of a person born on or after the sixth day of August 1962, if, at that date, his/her father or mother is a citizen of Jamaica by birth, descent, or registration by virtue of marriage to a citizen of Jamaica.

Harris was born Oct. 20, 1964, and her father was a citizen of Jamaica at the time of her birth. Therefore, the law of Jamaica is clear: Kamala Harris is a citizen of Jamaica, pursuant to Section 3Cb of the Constitution of Jamaica.

And what about citizenship of India? Harris’s mother was a citizen of India and, to the best of my knowledge, never actually became an American citizen. Does Kamala qualify for Indian citizenship, too?

No, she does not. Under Indian law, dual citizenship is not allowed. However, Indian law does allow persons of Indian origin certain benefits and privileges. A PIO (persons of Indian origin) card may be issued to those holding U.S. passports, who can prove their Indian origin up to three generations before along with spouses of Indian citizens or persons of Indian origin.

The PIO card is valid for fifteen years and provides the following benefits:

· exemption from registration at a Foreigners’ Regional Registration Office (FRRO) for periods of stay less than 180 days

· enjoy parity with non-resident Indians in economic, financial, and educational fields

· acquire, hold, transfer, or dispose of immovable properties in India, except for agricultural properties

· open rupee bank accounts, lend in rupees to Indian residents, and make investments in India, etc.

· being eligible for various housing schemes under the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) or the central or State governments

· their children can obtain admission in educational institutions in India in the general category quota for non-resident Indians

It should be noted that PIO card–holders are not entitled to the following:

· the exercise of any political rights

· visits to restricted or protected areas without permission

· mountaineering, research, and missionary work without permission.

It would be interesting to find out if Harris ever held or currently holds a PIO card.

Thus, Kamala Harris, United States senator, former candidate for the president of the United States, and current prospective candidate for vice president in the upcoming election, has competing foreign citizenship with the country of Jamaica and preferential status with the country of India.


26 posted on 08/11/2020 7:57:35 PM PDT by Bommer (I'm a MAGA-Deplorian! It is the way! It is the only way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: GreenLanternCorps

native born is not equal to natural born

her parents were not citizens


29 posted on 08/11/2020 8:07:49 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not Averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: GreenLanternCorps

Wrong. Both parents were citizens of foreign countries. She’s only a Native (anchor baby) US citizen; not a NBC.


77 posted on 08/12/2020 1:22:21 AM PDT by octex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: GreenLanternCorps
But it hasn't been narrowed, and in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the Court reaffirmed that people born in the U.S. are indeed American citizens, regardless of their parents' citizenship...

What an idiot that guy is!

UNITED STATES v. WONG KIM ARK

Acts May 6, 1882, c. 126 (22 Stat. 58); July 5, 1884, c. 220 (23 Stat. 115); September 13, 1888, c. 1015; October 1, 1888, c. 1064 (25 Stat. 476, 504); May 5, 1892, c. 60 (27 Stat. 25); August 18, 1894, c. 301 (28 Stat. 390). Basically, that says the case fell under Title 8 or its equivalent of the time!

Some people simply can't recognize that an ACT of Congress can't confer the status of natural born citizen upon a person while such an ACT can indeed confer the status of citizen to a person.

105 posted on 08/12/2020 7:36:04 AM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: GreenLanternCorps
Did you even read the link you posted? Second paragraph:

And Sir William Blackstone, who immensely influenced the Framers' understanding of the law, expressly explained that "Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England, that is, within the ligeance, or as it is generally called, the allegiance of the king." The test was place of birth, not the citizenship of parents.

This is contradicting itself. If the test is "allegiance to the king", then that depends on who your king is - not where you were born. Subject = citizen. It doesn't matter where you are born, it matters where your parents are citizens.

If it was up to me, I'd extend that even further and require a child born to native-born citizens. Natural-born should require parents who didn't naturalize, they were born of two citizen parents.
113 posted on 08/12/2020 10:19:09 AM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

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