PuhLEEZE, that is so 18th-Century!
Posted on 01/08/2009 7:33:20 PM PST by Puzo1
national security should drive the meaning of an Article II "natural born Citizen"
In defining what is a "natural born Citizen" under Article II, we are attempting to define what the standard to be President of the United States is as envisioned by the Founders of our nation and the Framers of the Constitution who had just fought a revolutionary war against a foreign power. That standard has to be an exacting one. We are not talking about the requirements to hold any other political office, to be a judge, or to be an ordinary citizen. We are not referring to a citizen defined in the 14th Amendment or by a Congressional Act. The Founders in their wisdom recognized the importance of the highest office in this country and for national security reasons singled it out in Article II, limiting it to individuals who have no conflicts in allegiance to our nation. The President alone has great power which is not the case for any Senator, Representative, or Judge who may not act alone but rather act as part of a collegial body. The President may act alone, despite his surrounding himself with a Cabinet and other political advisors. A non-Article II U.S. citizen (born on U.S. soil regardless of parental citizenship status or naturalized [14th Amendment citizenship] or born abroad to one or two qualifying U.S. citizen parents [Congressional Act citizenship ] is eligible to serve as governor, senator, representative, judge, mayor, etc. but not President.
The question of what is a "natural born Citizen" must be answered not only with the thought of what is "fair" and "politically correct" in our immigrant America, but also with what makes sense from a self-survival standpoint. Perception of how safe our world is today is not relevant in this analysis. When analyzing the national self-survival factor, we have to assume the most extreme examples, existing not only in today's world but also in that of the future. If there is any doubt on this issue, we must err on the side of national security and not on the side of a liberal philosophy espoused to please all people.
© Mario Apuzzo, Esq. January 8, 2009
ping
I’m a fan of Mario; it looks like you are as well, even if you don’t answer my questions...
PuhLEEZE, that is so 18th-Century!
To me, it’s self apparent that natural born citizen as an U.S. President is a national security issue as it was for the Founders.
Barring any staggering surprises, since the SCOTUS did not have the guts to even HEAR the suits brought to it, as well as an FEC and Demorat party (and so-called Republicans) that have worked VERY hard to suppress the entire matter, it is safe to say that the Constitution again has been thrown under the bus.
Expect much more of it, as the agenda of the Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Biden regime takes control. As one of my favorite talk show celebrities always says, “elections have consequences”.
Given Zero’s comments about Hamas and apparent indifference toward our friends in Israel or elsewhere, it should be apparent why we need to know who a man is BEFORE we elect him.
>>A would-be President in order to be a “natural born Citizen” under Article II of the Constitution has to be born on U.S. soil to two parents who were U.S. citizens (by birth or naturalization) at the time of his/her birth.<<
That would disenfranchise so many children of American Military as to be grossly unfair. Not to mention it would lead to great difficulty filling overseas posts on behalf of the U.S.
Page 47 is on the back!
>>To: Puzo1
I’m a fan of Mario; it looks like you are as well, even if you don’t answer my questions...<<
It would appear Puzo1 joined Freep just to start threads not to discuss.
The law was changed reguarding children of American military personnel. In fact it was made retroactive, which is how John McCain was able to run despite the fact that he was born prior to the law change.
It was a good change that hurt us this time.
Just wait...
One trillion in new spending next year on top an already one trillion deficit..... A 2 trillion plus deficit next year!
Dollar will go up in smoke. SS payments will increase.
I think I see a brick wall in the fast lane with Hussiens name on it.
What is U.S. soil is debatable under the military scenarios. McCain falls into this category. U.S. soil could be given a more relaxed meaning, especially if an expectant mother is at the “foreign” location for purposes of defending her nation. What is most important, however, is the U.S. citizenship of the mother and father at time of birth, for the allegiance of the parents is what give a child his/her values.
>>A would-be President in order to be a “natural born Citizen” under Article II of the Constitution has to be born on U.S. soil to two parents who were U.S. citizens (by birth or naturalization) at the time of his/her birth.<<
That would disenfranchise so many children of American Military as to be grossly unfair. Not to mention it would lead to great difficulty filling overseas posts on behalf of the U.S.
What in the world does this have to do with selecting the man who would head our nation?
One does not have to be an American in order to serve in the Armed forces. In fact, I have advocated that if illegals already here truly wish to be considered as American citizens, one way is to join up for three years. That way, they would better appreciate what this country strives for rather than just a better paying job than they would get back home.
Agreed.
“I think I see a brick wall in the fast lane with Hussiens name on it.”
It’s worse: the brick wall has 5 foot long, 3 inch thick titanium spears protruding from it AND is attached to the front end of a 230 MPH bullet train headed in our direction. We may survive the crash, but may be so dazed by the time it’s over, we may not even be able to remember who BHO is, much less pin the blame for the wreck on him.
“What, you mean THIS old thing?”
Nice graphic, but shouldn’t it also be torn into tiny shreds as well?
Boy, did your law professor screw up; he let a lawyer get out that really does understand the meaning of “is” !!
I really am amazed that this question has really illustrated one of Churchill’s Maxims: “A common society divided by language.”
Andrea; you may be interested in this.
Not to mention, this definition of 'natural born' --invented solely as an avenue to keep a Hawaiian-born Obama out of the White House is entirely fictional and has no basis in our Constitution or established case law.
People here can wish our Constitution said something it doesn't but wishing for it doesn't make it so.
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.