refer you to Clay Blair’s excellent study of the Korean War, “The Forgotten War”, page 146. I quote LTC Mike Michaelis, who had just been given command of the US Army’s 27th Wolfhound Regiment, and was ordered to immediately deploy from Japan to Korea in July of 1950. “We’d just had our first child-a daughter. The only thing I had time to do was rush to the American Consulate with my wife and get our daughter certified so that SHE WOULDN’T BE A JAPANESE CITIZEN. I put twenty-five dollars, a razor, and tooth brush in my pocket and took off.” His daughter was born in the US Army hospital on Honshu.
Japan had regained it’s sovereignty at that time, and it’s citizenship laws were in effect. Japanese citizenship law held that ANYONE born on Japanese soil was a Japanese citizen. However, the US and Japan had concluded Status of Forces Agreements concerning the children born to US military personnel on Japanese soil. US military bases were LEASED from the Japanese government to the US for use as bases. They were still considered to be Japanese soil. If they were US soil, then the child of a pregnant Japanese worker delivering on a US base would be a 14th amendment citizen, just as if she had delivered in the US Embassy, which is US soil. With the SOFA agreement in place at that time, the Japanese citizenship of their daughter was waived, and the child would be exclusively a US citizen, (not natural born, but by US immigration and naturalization statutes extant at the time,(in the manner of Ted Cruz)
Both Michaelis AND his wife were natural born US citizens, serving their country overseas. Despite this, the location of their daughter’s birth makes her not even a 14th amendment citizen, but a statute citizen via the existing US Immigration and Naturalization laws.
I don’t like this reality, I don’t think that it is fair, but I did not write Article II. Children born overseas to parents serving overseas are NOT NBC’s.
I support the children of active duty military overseas being NBC, but that would require an amendment IMO that’s why the resolution on McCain was unconstitutional. They knew he didn’t for the constitutional requirement
Funny.
I read that book while daubing my first of give tours in South Korea, while at Osan in '86.
But I don't remember that.
Again, I refer people back to the LAW written at the time of Tulsi Gabbard's birth.
From the biased and unreliable source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsi_Gabbard :
" ... Gabbard was born on April 12, 1981, in Leloaloa, Maoputasi County, on American Samoa's main island of Tutuila.[3] She was ... born to Carol (née Porter) and Mike Gabbard. In 1983, when Gabbard was two years old, her family moved to Hawaii. ...
Her father is of Samoan and European ancestry and an active lector at his Catholic church. Her mother, who was born in Decatur, Indiana, is of German descent and a practicing Hindu. ... "
Now there is a very important FACT in the link about her father,
Mike Gabbard.
" ... Mike, one of eight children, was born in 1948 in Fagatogo, American Samoa.
He was a U.S. citizen from birth because of his dad’s U.S citizenship. ... "
Now let's review what we know:
- 1. Tulsi Gabbard's father, IS a "U.S. citizen from birth because of his dad’s U.S citizenship."
- 2. Tulsi Gabbard's mother "who was born in Decatur, Indiana" IS a U.S. citizen from birth .
So, where is the LAW and WHAT does it say ?
Chapter 3 - United States Citizens at Birth (INA 301 and 309)
Appendix: Children Born Outside the United States in Wedlock (Nationality Chart 1) STEP 1: Determine period in which child was born
On or After Dec. 24, 1952 and Prior To Nov. 14, 1986 :
STEP 2: Determine parents’ citizenship at time of child’s birth
STEP 3: Did U.S. citizen (USC) parent meet residence or physical presence requirement prior to birth ? (If yes, child was a USC at birth)
At least one USC parent resided in the United States or OLP
STEP 4: Did child meet retention requirement (if any)? (Child lost citizenship on date it became impossible to meet requirement)
TITLE 8 / CHAPTER 12 / SUBCHAPTER III / Part I / § 1401 is the law governing this situation.
YOU SEE ?
... MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT HER FATHER, Mike Gabbard, WAS A U.S. CITIZEN FROM BIRTH .
SO ... the fact that Tulsi Gabbard was born on American Samoa ... has NO bearing on her citizenship.
NOW ... Read this:
Constitutional Topic: Citizenship
... Citizenship is mentioned in
If you're going to be involved in government in the United States, citizenship is a must.
To be a Senator or Representative, you must be a citizen of the United States.
To be President, not only must you be a citizen, but you must also be natural-born.
Aside from participation in government, citizenship is an honor bestowed upon people by the citizenry of the United States when a non-citizen passes the required tests and submits to an oath.
Natural-born citizen
Who is a natural-born citizen?
Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?
The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way:"All persons born or naturalized in the United States,and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
But even this does not get specific enough.
As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.
The Constitution authorizes the Congress to do create clarifying legislation inalso allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization,
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution.
Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
- Anyone born inside the United States *
* There is an exception in the law - - the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.
This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
- Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
- Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
- Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
- Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President.
These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.
Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such asEach of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date,
and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date.For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952).
Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States.Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.
The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama.
In 8 USC 1403, the law states thatanyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen,
was "declared" to be a United States citizen.Note that the terms "natural-born" or "citizen at birth" are missing from this section.
In 2008, when Arizona Senator John McCain ran for president on the Republican ticket, some theorized thatbecause McCain was born in the Canal Zone,
he was not actually qualified to be president.
However, it should be noted that section 1403 was written to apply to a small group of people to whom section 1401 did not apply.
McCain is a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c):"a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States
and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person."
Not everyone agrees that this section includes McCain - - but absent a court ruling either way, we must presume citizenship.
U.S. Nationals
A "national" is a person who is considered under the legal protection of a country, while not necessarily a citizen.
National status is generally conferred on persons who lived in places acquired by the U.S. before the date of acquisition.
A person can be a national-at-birth under a similar set of rules for a natural-born citizen.
U.S. nationals must go through the same processes as an immigrant to become a full citizen.
U.S. nationals who become citizens are not considered natural-born.
(Continued