Posted on 07/12/2010 9:03:49 PM PDT by jwb0581
Tebow was born in the Philippines to American citizen parents who were overseas on a mission trip.
Would he be eligible to serve as President?
She was and is an American citizen.
Yes. Citizenship is just a matter of faith. 0bama sez so.
(He’s a constitutional law expert doncha know.)
Right. No one is saying - at least I'm not - that Tebow isn't a citizen. Quite clearly he his because American citizenship may be obtained via jus soli or jus sanguinis. But, for the purposes of qualifying for the office President, one must have obtained their citizenship the legal principle of jus soli, as Scalia opines. Tebow quite clearly did not, thus he would not qualify, at least in the opinion of some constitutional and legal scholars.
Nope.
Would they call it SB611 as the fix would be in?
that may be but, not a Natural Born American.
If so he may even be over-qualified since he can actually play a sport without handicapped opponents.
Just to clarify. My one line about calling this thread stupid was not meant as a knock on you. I probally could of spoke better. Any question about the Constitution is a worthy question. I just feel frustrated that the American people are being told they have no ‘standing’ to have this question and issue resolved.
Thanks for that.
McCain was born in Colon Panama at the local hospital, off the military base and not in the Canal Zone. He produced his birth certificate and he is not a natural born citizen, jus soli.
Yet McCain had two American citizens parents and was never born but with full allegiance to the United States. He was born on a United States military base, no?
This issue of birthplace and parentage needs to be addressed by the Court and the Congress but yet it isn’t.
If it is we may then not even all agree on how it is decided but it MUST be addressed for the future.
Personally I believe that having TWO American citizen parents as well as fullfilling the other requirements of length of living in the US are the real deciding factors and not what soil you were born on but.....
If it is three factors (Two American parents plus you must be born on American soil) then so be it.
This issue MUST be addressed in the Courts and in the Congress, etc....
You have got to be kidding... Right ?
In today’s America that was created by idiots watching TV who are controlled by Obama’s allies. Idiots watching ball games where the NCAA, NBA, ESPN, NFL MBL all praise and fawn over O..
In Obam’s ZimbaAmerika - Tim Tebow is a “cracker white baby that needs to be killed.” He is a devout Christian in this nightmare so he is automatically disqualified in this new world. It’s over.
I have had to listen to idiots here praise Spielberg and Hanks for WW2 movies when they & the vets were being used by Hollywood for money. They hated WW2 vets it was the $$$ - they love Obama.
No. He is a citizen by operation of statute, not natural law.
Thus he is a statuatory citizen, perfectly fine, the same as my Son Gerry, born outside the US, but NOT the same as a Natural Born” citizen which is a person who is a natural citizen by virtue of the specific circumstances of his birth both jus soli and jus sanguinis, born on America of two citizen parents.
Why is this natural and operating outside any statute? It is because a person takes on the charcateristics of his father, and to a degree the place of his birth. If these are the same, then this individual has no competing influences for his loyalty and identity. He is naturally a citizen of the common place that he shares with his father and his birth. This natural form of citizenship actually does not even need the existence of a polity to validate it.
This can’t be said of either John McCain or Tim Tebow, althought McCain might have the stronger claim if he were to have been born in the Panama Canal Zone (US Sovereign territory) as opposed to the Republic of Panama (a foreign country).
The U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs manual say he is a natural born citizen by statute but not necessarily a natural born citizen for Constitutional purposes because the Courts have not ruled definitively on the status of children born abroad to two American citizen parents.
My original thought was yes, as long as his parents are both citizens, but now i say NO after reading this:
“The term Natural born Citizen appears in our Constitution, in Article 1, Section 2, with these words, “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.”
Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise “the Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19,
§ 212. Of the citizens and natives.
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
“
The 14th Amendment has been perverted by libtards to mean that anyone born in America is a citizen, which is blatantly incorrect and against the intent of the writers of the 14th Amendment. But now, as liberals always do, they’ve gone a step further in claiming that Obama is not just a citizen, but a NATURAL BORN citizen because he was born in Hawaii (supposedly)
Obama can never be a Natural Born citizen - he has only 1 parent that was a citizen. That’s all you need to know. He is a usurper.
say = says
She is a natural born citizen by statute (citizen at birth) but not necessarily one for Constitutional purposes.
I understand what you are trying to say, and I don't doubt that others have also used this particular formulation of speech, but the status of "natural born citizen" is one that cannot be conferred by statute. Citizen, yes, and to all practical purposes except eligibility for the presidency, indistinguishable from natural born citizenship, yet NOT the same.
And, to the best of my knowledge, the statute in question does not use any phraseology that includes the words "natural born". This is a result of someone assuming that all forms of citizenship acquired at birth are "natural born", but that is not the case.
Does he play golf?
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.