Replies

The following is from Chapter 2 of the Constitution of Jamaica,

A person born in Jamaica after August 5, 1962, or born outside Jamaica after that date to a parent who is a Jamaican citizen, is automatically considered a Jamaican citizen at birth. Furthermore, under current Jamaican legislation, citizens of Jamaica can hold multiple nationalities. And this status does not prohibit serving in the legislature of Jamaica. It is inconceivable to me that the intent of the framers of Article II would have been to allow such a thing for POTUS or VPOTUS.

Harris was born in Oakland, CA, on Oct. 20, 1964, and her father was a citizen of Jamaica at the time of her birth. Therefore, the law of Jamaica is clear: Kamala Harris is a citizen of Jamaica, pursuant to Section 3Cb of the Constitution of Jamaica. This law is very similar to the US Immigration and Naturalization Act with regard to children born to US citizens outsider of the boundaries of the US or it’s territories.

Wong Kim Ark was the subject of an 1898 SCOTUS ruling involving citizenship. The court held that Wong Kim Ark was a CITIZEN (not a natural born one) by virtue of the 14th amendment, noting that his Chinese citizen parents were lawfully resident within the US at the time of his birth, and completely self supporting.

The 14th amendment was ratified in 1868. It did not exist at the time that Article II was ratified in 1787. The 14th amendment does NOT refer to, or alter the meaning of Article II in ANY way, whatever one thinks that the framers meant for Article II to accomplish.

Harris’s birth status is identical to Wong Kim Ark. She was born in CA to two lawfully resident non citizen parents. She is NOT an Article II eligible Natural Born Citizen. She is a citizen at birth by virtue of the 14th amendment. I believe that Indian and Jamaican law make her a citizen of their countries too, as does US law under the Immigration and Naturalization Act which makes a person born to ANY US citizen ANYWHERE in the world a US citizen too.

It strains credulity to think that the framers of Article II, section one, clause 5 in 1787, INTENDED that at any time in the future, absent an amendment to allow for same, that a foreign citizen by birth would be eligible for the office of POTUS and VPOTUS.

None of the framers or founders were NBC. Most of them were born British subjects. They had to establish a grandfather clause by way of Article II, Section one, clause 5 to qualify themselves for the office of POTUS.

Our citizenship laws are similar to theirs. Our laws no more invalidate theirs then theirs do ours. It is a well recognized and mutually accepted international principle to allow mutual recognition for such laws.

How is the anchor baby Commie-La more “privileged” then the framers were, who were most of them born as British subjects?

Our overlords have decided that this is not an issue worth examining by adjudication. Constitutionalists know that the NBC requirement is designed to protect the office of POTUS from undue foreign influence, particularly from a father owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty, and it is worth observing, especially against an Anti-American opportunist like Harris.

I see no downside in attempting, no matter how forlorn the hope, to have this matter adjudicated by SCOTUS. No constitutional provision should be regarded as optional.