Posted on 05/07/2019 3:27:32 AM PDT by C19fan
The birth of Prince Harry and Meghan's baby boy has signalled the first time that a person has had the right to become both the British monarch and the US President. Baby Sussex is automatically a British citizen based on the Duke of Sussex's citizenship status and also due to being born in the UK. But assuming Meghan did not voluntarily give up her own US citizenship when she married Harry, which she was no required to do by law, the baby will also be granted American citizenship himself. The implication of being naturally-born citizen of the United States means Baby Sussex could one day run for office as US President.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Birther threads. Gotta love ‘em.
“Sorry.....Dual citizenship is not acceptable. The whole object of being a US Citizen is total loyalty to the country....AND....he is NOT a Natural Born citizen, i.e., born within the bounds of the United States.”
You are correct. Some people have a place to run to after screwing up the U.S.
That is essentially what our founders said, and they had just risked everything they had to fight a bloody, costly and difficult war with the Crown in order to say it.
Today, only duplicitous anti-Americans would say otherwise and with predictable results, as we recently witnessed.
Unfortunately, as our nation veers to the left at an accelerating pace with the current crop of aspiring presidential candidates, we may again witness such predictable results
What a hoot if we could tax them without representation!
Actually, the question was raised, but McCain immediately released all records, unlike Obama, who paid millions of dollars to keep his records sealed and secret.
I don't know what the truth is, but all the facts concerning this matter should be made public. The fact that Democrat operatives continue to keep these records concealed, as though there were something to hide, continues to raise suspicions.
Or King but not both.
As we find out definitively that the Usurper was actually born in Kenya without a doubt, they will need this sort of thing to obfuscate the legal reality that we had a US President who wasn’t eligible to be elected in the first place.
Uh no it can’t.
(And BTW, the only time I attended a Supreme Court Argument Scalia characterized errors on the part of the government as "foot faults." I wanted to jump up and scream, "Et tu Antonin," but I knew that all those guards standing amongst us peons would have squashed me like a bug.)
ML/NJ
The notion that Obama's pregnant teenage mother traveled by herself from comfortable modern Hawaii halfway around the world to a mud hut in Kenya where she had a baby, returned with baby to Hawaii, and then partook in a complicated ruse to make it appear that's where her child was born has got to be one of the most idiotic, retarded conspiracies in history.
If that is so, which it is not, the Winston Churchill had a right to run for President in the USA, as his mother was American. AND, she was part Indian, more so than Pocahontas Warren!
If Meghan still has her US citizenship, then her child would be considered Natural Born the same as a soldier, diplomat posted overseas or a US citizen who gives birth in a foreign country, ala Ted Cruz.
When Churchill was born US law did not grant automatic citizenship to child born abroad by a US mother married to a non-American.
The form does not convey citizenship, which exists regardless of the form. The form is a record of the birth of a US citizen overseas to prevent future complications.
Female US citizens overseas did not pass citizenship to their children with a foreign father until after 1934. Citizenship followed the father, as per the original intent of the Constitution.
It is not a matter of dual citizenship being “acceptable” or not.
Dual citizenship occurs when the laws of two different countries both confer citizenship on a single person.
The child’s mother is an American Citizen. The child automatically inherits her Citizenship. The child holds it by right and it can never be taken, making the child a natural born American Citizen.
It could only be renounced by the citizen child after he tuns 18 and only by deliberately doing so. Even if his mother later becomes a UK citizen and renounces her American citizenship she can’t renounce it for the child.
At the same time the child is the son of a UK citizen and a member of the Royal Family and in the line of succession to the throne, making the child a UK citizen at birth, again a citizen by right and under UK law that citizenship cannot be taken.
In the case of US law, the only thing that matters is if the child meets the requirements to be a citizen: either birth on American soil, or birth overseas to an American citizen parent.
The fact that UK law may make the child also a UK citizen is irrelevant to US law. And the Congress has no authority to take a persons citizenship if born an American just because another countries laws may make them a citizen of that country too.
She didn’t accept the title of Duchess. Her husband was made a Duke, by Letters Patent issued by the Queen.
As the wife of a Duke she gets the courtesy title of “Duchess”. The style of “Royal Highness” is not a title either but a Form of Address granted to certain members of the Royal Family meeting certain requirements.
Neither of these are legally titles of nobility under US law.
Well, no. Neither of Netanyahu’s parents were American citizens and he was not born here. At least that much is unambiguous.
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.