No, The Constitution Does Not Allow Children Born Of Non-Citizens To Become President Of The United States

The Gateway Pundit ^ | 19 Jan 2024 | Paul Ingrassia

[CDR Kerchner]

You may be a horse per the common law you describe, which is a part of “Positive Law”, but you are not a horse per “Natural Law”. And the term “natural born Citizen” is a Natural Law term. That is what the adjective “natural” means. By Natural Law, not Positive man-made laws, amendments, or treaties. Most people don’t know the difference between Positive Law and Natural Law. First year law students are taught the difference but as soon as they get involved politically they tend to immediately forget it, for political agenda reasons of their client or political party or personal aspirations.

[Reno89519]

I presume you are talking about the hit piece on her adultery?
Her adultery was 13-15 years ago! Already aired during her time campaigning or serving as governor. And if folks are going to accept Trump’s marital behavior, well, she’s pretty mild in comparison.

[Reno89519]

Actually I think Democrats will embrace this at some point to deny Harris being on ticket to replace Biden. There was something in the news about this a week or so ago.

[DiogenesLamp]

“True” in this case, of political practice, is not and cannot be a philosophical ideal, according to the line of development of the national ideology of the United States, which comes via Aristotle and Locke, etc.

I do not believe that truth and the law must be mutually exclusive, though in observing it all my life, it often seems to be the case.

The “natural born” position is very much a Platonic one, of imagining an ideal form.

If you look at the history of it, Jus Sanguinus seems to be the vastly dominant method used going all the way back to the Greeks. Aristotle himself mentions it.

But the citizen whom we are seeking to define is a citizen in the strictest sense, against whom no such exception can be taken, and his special characteristic is that he shares in the administration of justice, and in offices. ... But in practice a citizen is defined to be one of whom both the parents are citizens;

[CDR Kerchner]

So if someone robs a bank breaking the law and never gets caught and prosecuted, we therefore should not do everything we can to prevent another person from robbing a bank. There is not precedent when the law has been broken by the first event.

[buwaya]

This matter, about the ideal definition of “natural born”, it seems to me, has a very small following. This certainly isnt a typical “Maga” concern.

[mbj]

+1

[Auntie Dem]

Interesting...how does Congress repeal an article of the Constitution by a statute? Our Constitution requires a Constitutional Amendment to do that. We are truly a lawless nation. Why should any one of us ever obey any law at all?

[DiogenesLamp]

2. Did Haley ever undergo an actual "naturalization" process in order to become a citizen?

Do foreign born children of American citizens go through a "process"?

No. But they are still naturalized. They are made citizens by one of the naturalization acts of Congress, such as the naturalization act of 1952, which is how Barack may have gotten whatever sort of citizenship he actually has, if any.

The 14th amendment is a naturalization law. If you are a citizen only because of the 14th amendment, you are a naturalized citizen, even though no one treats you as if you are a naturalized citizen.

But you can go look at the debates in Congress on the 14th amendment, and they will tell you, that the 14th amendment is naturalization.

It is the making of people into citizens by a law passed by congress.

A "natural born citizen" is someone who, by operation of law -- i.e., whatever law was in place at the time of the person's birth -- was a U.S. citizen at birth. That's all "natural born citizen" means, and that's all the term has ever meant.

That's incorrect. That's just the oft repeated modern claims by people who wanted Barack Obama to be legal.

If you look in history, you find out this isn't correct. Here is an example.

Law book from 1817 Pennsylvania.

[Seruzawa]

Shh. Don’t disturb them or else you might start getting chemtrails and sovereign citizen lectures as well.

[CDR Kerchner]

Obama and his Progressive/Marxist gas-lighting operation “Team Obama” used fear of being called a racist, white voter guilt, and Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals “ridicule” tactic, with a very enabling major main stream media and the complicity of both major political parties to abrogate the truth about the “natural born Citizen” term in the Presidential Eligibility clause of our Constitution. As I have said and have written, the fix was in for the 2008 election cycle to abrogate the “natural born Citizen” term. The Repubs wanted to run Jindal, Rubio, Cruz, and several others which is why they were part of the effort to subvert the “nbC” term in our constitution. See this for more about how the fix was put in by both major political parties: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2010/01/24/i-believe-the-fix-was-in-for-the-2008-election-and-the-cover-up-is-still-going-strong-the-perfect-storm-for-a-constitutional-crisis/

[buwaya]

“natural law” is (by adoption) a Catholic concept. We went through that quite thoroughly in high school. It has nothing to do, definitionally, or conceptually, with the “natural” in “natural born”.

[Vermont Lt]

I was talking about Nikki’s tryst. Not Fani’s. Fani’s gonna get ‘effed twice by that guy. LOL

[CDR Kerchner]

Nikki Haley was “naturalized” at and by birth via 8 USC Section 1401 which states who are naturalized U.S. Citizens at and by birth. And that is a man-made law, not natural law. And what man give man can take away. But what is created by natural law, not man can take away.

I suggest all here read the preambles to the Declaration of Independence and our U.S. Constitution and our Bill of Rights to learn more about the Natural Law and the Laws of Nature influence of our founders and framers in their thinking when creating our new country and our new Constitution in the summer of 1787.

[DiogenesLamp]

I was talking about Nikki’s tryst. Not Fani’s. Fani’s gonna get ‘effed twice by that guy. LOL

Oh. Sorry then. I don't care about Nikki's tryst, but yeah, it's not looking very good for Fanni and her boo.

[theoilpainter]

This is BS. My family fled Poland to escape the oppression of Jews. My grandfather was born here in CA. They were all proud to be Americans - and yes, they were Republicans.

My grandfather became famous at something else.....but had he intended to run for POTUS, he could. He was born here. He was a natural born US citizen. My family did not have to wait another generation to have an offspring who was eligible.

All of the first American Presidents were US citizens the day of independence. They were born here. They were not born of “US citizens”. It would be at least two generations before we had a POTUS who was both born here and born to US citizens.

If you don’t like Haley, then don’t vote for her. But she is eligible to run for the office.

[jonrick46]

What I read in Jan. 19’s “Daily Mail” is devastating to Nikki Haley:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12985341/nikki-haley-affair-bans-reporters-david-marcus.html

[CDR Kerchner]

Read: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/Presidents-Grandfathered-or-NBC-or-Frauds.pdf

[DiogenesLamp]

“natural law” is (by adoption) a Catholic concept. We went through that quite thoroughly in high school. It has nothing to do, definitionally, or conceptually, with the “natural” in “natural born”.

I think it is more than just a Catholic concept. My recollection is that Samuel Rutherford was Presbyterian or something. John Locke started as a Calvinist.

The British had their own version of "natural law." To them, it was "natural" that the King would rule over other men, and that he was chosen by God to perform that task, and disobedience to the King, was tantamount to disobedience to God.

Rule by "Divine Right."

This is a different foundation for their natural law than that which America adopted.

[DouglasKC]

I think this is a dead issue. I agree with your position, but the courts are idiots and do not care what the truth is. Discussing this topic will have no real world impact. They are going to do it anyway.

They already did it. NObody is gonna touch this becuase it means that Obama wasn't eligible. He wasn't but nobody cares except us crazy conspiracy theorists.