Posted on 12/23/2018 8:58:07 AM PST by simpson96
The SCOTUS has never directly ruled on the meaning of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the constitution with regard to POTUS eligibility. But in SCOTUS cases wherein they have given a definition of what a NBC (or a 14th amendment citizen in the case of Wong Kim Ark)is, Minor vs Haperstatt, Venus Merchantman Case of 1814) they defined an NBC as a person born of TWO, count them TWO citizen parents (the parents don’t have to be NBC) and born in one of the states of the Union, or the territories.
The authors of the 14th amendment, in the Congressional debates on the matter, also defined an NBC in the same manner. Rep. Bimgham and Senator Jacob Howard were the principal authors of the 14th amendment. Here is a quote from Howard which clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment in 1866, which was to define citizenship. He stated: “Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”
Until this matter is formally adjudicated by the Court, I will defer to their NBC stare decisis definitions. Trump Jr., Kamala Harris, Obama and a host of others were not, are not, and can NEVER be constitutionally eligible to be POTUS.
Whatever one thinks what the meaning of Article II, Section 1, clause 5 is, it is clear that the adoption of the 14th amendment did not alter it in any constitutional sense. How else can you account for the fact that the constitution only specifies for the office of senator and representative citizenship for a period of 9 and 7 years respectively, while the constitution requires the POTUS, to be NATURALLY born, owing allegiance to no other country? That is the ONLY constitutional provision for NBC. Obviously, there is a singular distinction with regard to that office. Under Jamaican and Indian citizenship law, for instance, It is conceivable that Jamaica or India could claim that Kamala Harris, thru her parents, is a citizen who owes allegiance to both of those countries FROM HER BIRTH. It was conferred upon her by those countries citizenship laws, just as valid as our own.
By the way, Ted Cruz (who I admire very much) made a very public demonstration of the fact that he was going to FORMALLY renounce his CANADIAN citizenship. What NATURALLY BORN US citizen has to do such a thing?
The framers of the constitution were patriarchs. (Yes I understand that is completely out of tune with modern sensibilities, but nonetheless it is true.) They believed that the citizenship of the FATHER was conferred upon his children. SCOUTUS incorporated in toto the ENTIRE 212th paragraph of Emerich De Vattel’s Law of Nations in their 1814 Venus merchantman case as they defined what an NBC is. Here is the money quote that Justice Livingstone that was cited when he wrote for the majority, “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.”
I suspect the reason that many do not want this issue formally examined is that they wish to foster and enhance the globalist influence on the office of POTUS. The NBC requirement was never intended to be a guarantee of allegiance, but a safeguard against undue foreign influence on the office of POTUS, PARTICULARLY from a father owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. The oath of naturalization requires a formal and legal renunciation of any prior national allegiances.
Jennie Spencer-Churchill, known as Lady Randolph Churchill, was a natural born US citizen, and a British socialite, the wife of Lord Randolph Churchill and the mother of British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill.
Under US citizenship law at the time of Churchill’s birth, despite the fact that his mother was a NATURAL BORN US citizen, she could not transmit her US citizenship on to young Winston owing to her marriage to a foreign national, Sir Randolph Spencer Churchill, who was Winston’s father. That would not be legally allowed until the passage of the Cable Act of 1922, well after Churchill’s birth in 1874. The Cable Act only confers citizenship, NOT NATURALLY BORN citizenship. It did not refer to, or alter the meaning of an Article II, Sec. 1, clause 5 “natural born citizen” in any way.
Churchill was granted HONORARY US citizenship by an act of Congress on 9 April 1963. It was understood that his birth to a an NBC citizen US mother in Great Britain did not make him a citizen by law.
This is just one more indication of the fact that Trump Jr., Obama, Cruz, Rubio OR Harris can NEVER be constitutionally eligible to the office of POTUS. We need to have this issue finally adjudicated by SCOTUS for the first time in US history, and finally get a definitive answer one way or another.
We have enough naturally born anti-american, anti-constitutional cultural marxists in our country now who aspire to be POTUS. I say let’s eliminate all those who don’t even meet the basic Article II criteria. Winnow the opposition.
This matter is SCREAMING for a definitive ruling on the meaning of Article II, Section 1, clause 5, by the SCOTUS for the first time in the history of the US. It is revealing to note what Clarence Thomas told a House subcommittee that when it comes to determining whether a person born outside the 50 states can serve as U.S. president when he said that the high court is “evading” the issue. The comments came as part of Thomas’ testimony before a House appropriations panel discussing an increase in the Supreme Court’s budget in April of 2017. Thomas said that to Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y.
After two Obama terms, I think they are terrified of the implications of a ruling based on originalist constitutional intent and interpretation. That does not excuse the cowardice in refusing a grant of certiorari for those who wish to have SCOTUS exercise it’s Article III oversight on this matter.
Don Jr’s marriage was over before he started dating Kimberly Guilfoyle.
I recall a story of a shot down Tuskegee Fighter pilot (I think it was from Lt. Col. Alexander Jefferson’s account “Red Tail Captured, Red Tail Free,” but I am not sure) who was interrogated by a German Oberleutnant speaking perfectly accented US English in the Stalag where he was being held.
The airman asked the German officer why he spoke such good English. He explained that he had been brought to the US by his parents when he was 10 years old. He was caught while visiting Germany by Adolph Hitler’s Declaration of war on the US on Dec 11 1941. After a brief internment, He said that he had been drafted into the German Army and the German citizenship laws at the time as a VOLKSDEUTSCHE citizen. He fought on the Eastern Front, was wounded and transferred to the Western Front and fought against the Allies in Italy, including US troops. Wounded again, he was sent to the Stalag as an interrogater.
After the war, a charge of treason was considered against him. But the charges were dropped when it was determined that the Germans did have the right to conscript him as a natural born German citizen, under THEIR laws, and that he was a lawful enemy combatant.
Yes, circumstances can certainly dictate when you are subject to a foreign power.
Accordingly, the framers wanted to minimize (not guarantee) the likelihood of undue foreign influence upon the office of POTUS, particularly from a father owing an allegiance to a foreign sovereignty.
I was trying to say it nicely. It sounds better than saying she was screwing a man with a wife and children but that is exactly what she did. Had junior been divorced or even separated, that would be a different story.
judging people when you don’t really understand their circumstances is unkind and unfair.
If you support or don't support that kind of behavior - that's making a judgement.
Somehow we use different standards when we judge Democrats versus Republicans. A Republican cheating on his wife seems to get a pass.
That has nothing to do with what I stated. Amazing how some people don’t comprehend what they read!
Kim is and always has been trash - how and when she came into Don Jr’s life is irrelevant.
Don Jr. is more an American Citizen than Obama ever was. 1. Born in America, 2. Father a natural born American, Mother became in American. If Obama could serve—so to Don Jr. If he would take the pay cut and run for the office. This would only happen if Trump dies in office. An angry population would propel him into office.
She must be a really nice person. Don Jr has reason to stay away from hangers on or the insincere. At least she isn’t a gold digger, even as she does love strong, big-ego guys.
If you take away the marriages, JFK and DJT are not sexually criminal. There is a huge difference between being a “playa” and the President between them (Clinton) who literally raped and groped unwilling women, many. The two above just weren’t respectful of their marriages.
I assume Don Jr is indeed separated from his ex.
My husband and I were just talking about her yesterday and wondering where she was. I’m glad to hear that she seems to be doing well.
I think that Don Jr. would probably be a good POTUS. I have no doubt of his patriotism and his love of this nation. None whatsoever.
But ignoring the constitutional principles that underlie the premise of Article II, Section 1, clause 5 is what gave us the grotesque anti American Marxist administration of Obama. I want to restore the constitutional understanding of NBC to minimize the likelihood of another Obama. Our constitutional republic may not survive a repeat of him.
Emphatically NOT.
I was recognising that the Mulatto Menace was the dems perfect candidate for further destruction of the Constitution.
Anyone who attacked his eligibility under the Constitution, Article II was branded a racist.
A complicit “judiciary” struck down multiple filings under the No Standing edicts. Basically saying We The People have no ability to vet candidates under Article II of the Constitution.
It ain’t me saying it, its the left dominated courts including SCOTUS.
We can’t rely on the courts, any of them including SCOTUS.
Remember how we were told by judges that We The People have No Standing to vet our national leaders under the Constitution.
Nothing short of a bloody coup or successful civil war will return us to the Founders vision of government.
Yes, we can dream.
But whilst we’re dreaming the left is scheming.
She would still be a lot of fun for a week end
I don’t. Now, I am looking at that last photo of her and thinking she has had work done on her face, and she looks, a little, like Melania. Was that on purpose?
“She would still be a lot of fun for a week end”
Yes, yes indeed.
Merry Christmas al baby.
You too MC
I really don’t want to argue with you but Trump was separated legally. Still I do agree with you in that it’s a family tragedy. It makes me ill in fact and having gone through a recent divorce after 35 years of marriage, mostly happy, I can speak to this. I’m absolutely devastated and not sure I’ll ever overcome the grief it has caused. He also found someone else he knew 5 weeks. Walked out a week before Christmas last year and he’s already remarried. Ok I need to stop. I am generally very private. Just suffice to say my heart is forever broken and I don’t know this once great man anymore.
So yes I don’t really support the behavior but I know Don Jr.’s wife didn’t want him anymore and supported his moving on.
I wish you the best. Merry Christmas. We agree far more than you might think. :)
“There would be no womanizer without the gold digger.”
Agreed. It’s telling that Scripture plainly warns about certain women being SEXUAL PREDATORS:
“...but the adulteress preys upon your very life.”—Proverbs 6:26
Just another unpopular view to add to the list.
My case of last resort is preparation for civil war. The forces arrayed against the constitution and for cultural marxism have never been stronger or more entrenched. I have 5 AR-15 rifles for me and my family, chambered in different calibers, with about 20,000 total rounds of ammunition. my house is rigged to run off of an 8,750 watt portable generator, and I am raising chickens and growing vegetables. I have a 6 month stockpile of canned goods. I am as self sufficient as I can be.
I have no intention of going on some lone wolf spree against a rogue government. But should a duly elected governor in a state or states call up their militias to defend against a tyrannical and anti-constitutional government, I intend to volunteer my services.
So I do understand where you are coming from. I just hope that the worst won’t be necessary.
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.