Posted on 05/07/2019 3:27:32 AM PDT by C19fan
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 ..Meghan did not voluntarily give up her own US citizenship ... 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.
1) Natural born US Citizen, but not Natural Born UK Citizen??? Really! How is that determined?
2) How can the future leader have allegience to two separate Countries?
3) Just what is a Natural Born Citizen?
No, while she is is in the process of getting UK citizenship, she is currently an American Citizen living in the UK.
Actually, No Name’s status was cleared via a sham Senate Resolution.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/sres511/text
Neither Republican nor Dem candidate was eligible. The Dems threatened to derail No Name.
Hillary and 0bama supported the resolution, implicitly giving 0bama cover and a agreed pass.
Very Well stated!
I always considered the adjective “natural” a legal negative logic device. Some legal content describe what the object is not. Then, the object can be litigated as only one thing.
The powers NOT DELEGATED to the United States by the Constitution, NOR prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
When stated using negative legal logic, everything not forseen or considered automatically fall to the States or We the People. You are blocked from making any other arguement!
A natural Born Citizen is one where a Foreign jurisdiction cannot bestow it’s Citizenship to that new born baby.
That only occurs when a baby is born on US soil to US Citizen parents
Exactly. She has quite a high opinion of herself.
he is NOT a Natural Born citizen, i.e., born within the bounds of the United States.
And not born of two citizen parents.
which is generally what our laws are based on.
The problem is that it’s clear the original intent was that citizenship should follow the father, and there’s no amendment to change that. But in 1934, Congress extended citizenship through the mother as well, ignoring Constitutional procedure.
The two-parent claim just obscures the issue.
They are so far off base on this it’s
stupid....
I was one of the named plaintiffs in an eligibility-related lawsuit filed before the 2008 election. You are wrong when you say that no one questioned McCain’s eligibility. You are also wrong when you say that no one questioned McCain’s citizenship. And as best I recall, you are also wrong when you say he was born on a US base.
McCain was born in the Republic of Panama, not on a US base located there. U.S. law did allow for some folks born in Panama to be citizens at birth, but one of the criteria necessary for that was that the parents had to be lawfully married. McCain himself has written that his parents were married in a famous Mexican bar. Unfortunately, Mexico at that time did not recognize marriages performed in any bar as lawful. As unfair as it may be, McCain was not a citizen of the U.S. at birth, and he was never subsequently naturalized. Can a person be a natural born citizen without being a citizen? No. Some people point to McCain campaign’s failure to press the question of Obama’s eligibility as evidence that of course Obama was eligible. I think they’re drawing the wrong conclusion. McCain would not have wanted eligibility to be an issue because the evidence was more clear that he was ineligible than the evidence was for Obama.
But then they'd have to drown the registrar who issued it.
There was no such intent.
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.