Replies

Actually if the parents have submitted paperwork to become permanent residents, the children are Natural Born Citizens. Children of parents who are temporary residents or on Visas would not be Natural Born Citizens because they have not subjected themselves to the jurisdiction of the United States.

You accuse everyone else of having "emotional arguments" and your own arguments are dripping with emotion.

A lot of posters have made solid legal arguments as to why Rubio is a Natural Born Citizen. You disagree. We know that. But your arguments are dripping with the emotionality that you have accused others of using. I have used nothing more or less than the professional legal reasoning that people pay me hundreds of dollars an hour to provide. Sorry if you disagree. We can't agree on everything.

Rubio is a Natural Born Citizen in my interpretation of the Constitution. I suspect that the Supreme Court would agree with me. The only way we will know is if Rubio is elected and someone can get the case before the Supreme Court. I can tell you without resorting to any emotional arguments that that will NEVER happen.

>> “Actually if the parents have submitted paperwork to become permanent residents, the children are Natural Born Citizens” <<

.
Complete nonsense!

If I submit an application for a class A driver’s license, am I then at that moment qualified to drive an 80 ton truck down your street without passing the eye test, diving test, and legal test?

You seem to believe that the constitution is a ‘flexible’ document (or is it Ellen Tauscher’s “little blue dress?”)

As I have said, I have seen some evidence that the founders would accept the children of foreigners as natural born citizens if the father established an intention to be a citizen. The "naturalization act of 1790" indicates this, as does the Virginia declaration on who shall be deemed a citizen amended after 1779. (I don't remember the exact year.)

It is a point that I am interested in finding supporting data for or against.