Posted on 11/12/2010 4:53:42 PM PST by Retired Intelligence Officer
I need some help on this. I was reading where Bobby Jindal was born to immigrants here on visas. If he was born in Baton Rouge before they became naturalized citizens, wouldn't that make him ineligible to become President? I am in a heated argument at another website over this and I need answers to this controversy. Any help would be appreciated.
R.I.O.
Thanks for filling me in ... I was relying on TV coverage of Bobby on the Beach... OH well - my original assessment was correct - Not Presidential Material ...
Bobby can be part of the Republican team - he has value — but higher level leadership than Governor - no way ... maybe U.S. House - (wasn’t he already there...) anyway ... no big loss...
The constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words [citizen and natural born citizen], either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except in so far as this is done by the affirmative declaration that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.
Besides, if one refers to "International Law", I'm sure that most of it is codified by multiple treaties, i.e. Geneva Convention, etc. So, while it is a "catch-phrase", the founders has some definite ideas what it meant.
“I am keeping up. That still doesn’t make him a natural born citizen under Article 2 Section 1 of the constitution”
First of all, that clause by itself doesn’t tell you anything about what a “natural born citizen” consists of. It merely tosses the phrase off and assumes we know what it means.
Secondly, you are apparently not keeping up, and have missed the 150 or so years since the Constitution was amended on the subject of citizenship status at birth.
“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.”
Natural-born citizen simply means someone who is a citizen from birth, ie, not a naturalized citizen. That’s it, nothing more.
Where are those “far and above” requirements in law? We know this much - they DO NOT EXIST in US law. There are no requirements in US law defining natural born citizen to be anything other than what it means - someone who is a citizen from their birth.
Under the jurisdiction, whether legal or illegal alien, means that person is under the jurisdiction of their home country until they become citizens of this country. It does not mean they are under the jurisdiction of U.S. law.
“Why did our Congress keep quiet? Because McCain was also ineligible”
In my opinion a child born to a serving US-citizen military officer and his US-citizen wife anywhere in the world is a natural born citizen of the USA. “Natural born citizen” is about inherited loyalty at birth, not geography.
Who should I believe, an anonymous internet troll named WOSG, or one of the Founding Fathers?
Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defines Natural Born Citizen in 1789
Again, tell me what the difference between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen is?
Cannot be POTUS, failed to qualify.
Sorry but that is the law, and unfortunately for America nobody is enforcing it, so its a pointless discussion.
If people want Bobby to run and he wins then all we will see is a repeat of those claiming he is eligible like the Obots and Obamas supposedly eligibility.
Pursue Obama, make the case and Bobby has chance, ignore Obama and drop the case Bobby could be POTUS.
Its fish or cut bait.
Been there, done that years ago, Wong Kim Ark and the whole ine yards ... and this issue has been hashed out with bad and poor attempts to confuse people away from the obvious simple truth.
The truth is wonderfully simple: There is NO distinction between ‘natural born citizen’ and ‘citizen from birth’. They are one and the same, and if you disagree, show me the cite. You cannot. It is a mythical as unicorns.
Everyone who is a citizen at the time of birth can run for President.
So why beat around the Bush - anyone pretending NBC is some ‘special’ level of citizenship beyond the citizenship we ALL got at birth is blind to what the 14th amendment says, and quoting Vattel as if it applies here is deluded and ignorant of real constitutional law.
In this case, the majority of the Court held that a child born in U.S. territory to parents who were subjects of the emperor of China and who were not eligible for U.S. citizenship, but who had “a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China” was a U.S. Citizen.
Children of Diplomats are not American Citizens unless one of their parents were.
You are beginning to sound like a Hillsdale Professor.
Its a complement.
“I have no idea what you are talking about. You comment makes no sense. Citizens who were “born citizens”? What does that mean”
Why so confused? It’s simple. There are two classes of citizenship: people who are born citizens, either through their parents or through the soil; and people who are made citizens, through the naturalization process.
“The question was: if he was born on US soil to non-citizen parents, is he eligible to be president.”
Yes, I know, and the answer is yes.
“People who are not born on US soil are not eligible to be president, with very narrow exceptions, such as was the case of John McCain”
I’m not entirely clear on the McCain case, and don’t think it ever was decided concretely.
“The ‘citizens who are not eligible to be President because they were not born on US soil’ to which I refer are naturalized citizens, such as Arnold S., who is not eligible to run for the presidency.”
You are aware, I trust, that not all citizens born elsewhere are naturalized.
“He is a citizen, but he was not born on US soil.”
Really, the more significant fact in his case is that he was not born a citizen at all, much less on U.S. soil.
“People who are born on US soil are 1) citizens and 2) eligible to run. Jindal meets the criteria.”
I agree, with the obvious exceptions (children of diplomats, chidren of invading armies, members of Native American tribes).
There is a difference between Natural Born Citizen and Citizen. There has to be.
“But, as everyone with common sense and without an ideological axe to grind knows, born citizens are natural born citizens”
... that’s the killer, aint it... people are trying SO HARD not to read the 14th amendment the way it was so obviously written, missing the boat.
“So you are saying anchor baby’s are eligible to become President?”
Because they are.
You are absolutely correct.
“If his parents were here illegally or on a tourist visa and he happened to be born here, then the ‘subject to’ test fails a strict constructionist test”
Who says? Since when aren’t legal and illegal aliens subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. law?
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.