Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 05/20/2026 4:46:28 PM PDT by Libloather
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) unveiled legislation Wednesday aiming to ban foreign-born US citizens from serving in Congress and other high levels of the federal government.
The South Carolina congresswoman singled out Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Shri Thanedar (D-Ill.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) in announcing her joint resolution to add an amendment to the US Constitution that would prohibit naturalized US citizens from becoming federal judges, holding Senate-confirmed positions or serving in the House or Senate.
“All born in foreign countries, none were citizens by birth. All sitting in the United States Congress. All making clear every single day their loyalty is not to America,” Mace said of the trio of Democratic reps.
Mace noted the proposed amendment would impose the “very same standard the President and Vice President are already required to meet” on lawmakers and top government officials.
“The people writing America’s laws, confirming America’s judges, and representing America on the world stage should have one loyalty: America. Not any other country,” she argued.
“For too long we have allowed foreign born members to hold seats in this government while making clear they are America last, not America first,” Mace added. “We see it every day.
“This constitutional amendment will put an end to it.”
Twenty-six House members, including 19 Democrats and seven Republicans, were born outside of the US.
In the upper chamber, six senators – four Democrats and two Republicans – were born outside the US.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
No foreign-born person should hold any federal elective office or cabinet level position.
If the states want to elect foreigners, that’s their business.
You could impose all of the additional requirements that you want and it would not contradict the constitutional requirements. They are only minimum requirements, which leaves open any manner of more restrictive requirements. They are not written in a way that grants eligibility. Read them again with that thought in mind and their true meaning becomes clear (at least I think it does, which counts for nothing).
The key to straightening this mess out is educating the voters. As long as voters are stupid things will only get worse.
Eliminating immigrates from holding office is not the solution. The stupids will always plenty of natural born corrupt socialists vying for their vote.
There’s tons of these Congress critters who have dual citizenship, which is probably an even bigger concern over where their loyalties actually lie. Last time I looked into it there was no official record of who they all were, either.
It needs to include anchor babies.
Same here.
Agreed.
I’d take it one step further. At this point, anyone not born on US soil should have their citizenship revoked and be sent packing. Immigrants have been a drain on our society for 50 years. Getting a piece of paper doesn’t magically give you patriotism. Every immigrant serves two masters, and a house divided cannot stand. Deport them all.
ANY government office, especially those held by election.
I don’t know, it seems to me that, hypothetically speaking, legislatively imposing a requirement to be a citizen for 10 years, or 25 years, etc. would not affect the constitutional requirement to have been a citizen for AT LEAST 7 years. Ten years IS at least seven years, as is 25, for example. A requirement to be a natural-born citizen, in concert with the constitutional requirement to be at least 21 years of age, would work mathematically as well, though it would probably draw much stronger scrutiny since the requirement to have been a citizen for “at least” seven years strongly implies that the authors did not intend for this level of public service to be limited in that way.
>>”This is a distinction but there is no underlying difference”
Of course there’s a difference. Any lawyer can tell you the difference is between a right and a requirement. But forget that. But you don’t have to be a lawyer to understand that a right and a requirement are two different things. All it takes is a modicum of intelligence and familiarity with the English language.
If being a citizen for seven years gave you the Constitutional right to be a member of Congress the article in question would say something along the lines of:
“Any Person is qualified to be a Representative who shall have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who is when elected, an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.”
but it doesn’t say that. It says:
“No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.”
Don’t be stupid.
And then, there’s all the foreign-born judges...
Ban them, too.
>>”It’ll take a Constitutional amendment to change anything spelled out in the original Constitution or its existing amendments.”
The legislation proposed by Mace doesn’t change the Constitution. The requirement in Article I Section 2 would still remain. All that would change would be that additional requirements would have been added, legislatively. Don’t double down on stupid. Just admit you were wrong and made a mistake, and move on.
Stupid idea.
Native Americans are here by accident of birth. They won the birth lottery.
Naturalized Americans, except for some recent arrivals enticed by democrat policies and ideologies and the democrat welfare trough, are here by choice,
They want to be Americans. They could teach quite a few native Americans about civics, patriotism, and the shining city on the hill that is America for them.
I married one. Stop by some time if you want learn about the America you never had interest in learning.
Inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen?
Does that mean only males are allowed to be members of Congress? Based on the constitution as written?
How it used to be. See bidens senate records.
Same as Immigration Attorneys?
I guess you can start with him:
or him:
or him:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florent_Groberg
or him:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_V._Rascon
I’ll second that emotion.
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.