Posted on 02/16/2008 8:19:47 PM PST by Tai_Chung
There have been some posts on this topic already, but they are incomplete and the Mccain campaign, Wikipedia, and other sources have weaseled around it with a reference to a 1790 act of Congress defining foreign-born children of US citizens as natural-born, thus meeting to requirements to run for President.
I started digging into the Act of Congress that Mccain's campaign said got him around this (5th Congress, March 26th 1790), but found that this act was repealed by the same Congress, January 29th, 1795, RE-defining such children as just American citizens (not natural-born, as required for Pres. by the Constitution), and that this act was re-repealed April 14th, 1802 by the 6th Congress, keeping the same definition of foreign-born US citizens.
Unless someone can show me something I've missed (and I can find nothing anywhere referring to ANY other defense on this issue as of yet), Mccain is NOT a natural-born citizen of the United States and according to all applicable laws I've found, is NOT eligible to run for President. Links to these Acts of Congress:
The reason you are referring to the code book is that you can't point to the law which you presume to be codified in that book.
By the way, what of the male descendants of Lafayette? I didn't see it on your list. If the code book failed to include it does it mean that the law has been repealed by the code book author?
Like it or not, McCain is a natural born U.S. citizen and is eligible to be president. If you don't like the idea of a McCain presidency then I suggest you find other ways to thwart it.
Congress even saw fit to remove the one statute that granted natural born status to children born to US parents abroad as a safeguard against mixed loyalties.
We can now see that it was a good idea as we currently have a US citizen who is a natural born Latin American named John McCain cheering on throngs of natural born Latin Americans who have invaded the US.
McCain is a U.S. citizen, unfortunately.
Why not go and actually read the legislation, specifically Section 301, then get back to us?
By the way, McNut can also run for Panamanian president.
By Panamanian law, he is a Panamanian citizen; and by their laws, he cannot renounce his Panamanian citizenship.
Regards.
“McCain is a U.S. citizen, unfortunately.”
One half U.S...At least it should make it half better. : )
Half better is better than “0” better.
Now you are a one person Supreme Court?
actually the Panama Canal Zone was a US Territory thru 12-31-1999; McCain was born in a US Air Force hospital to US parents, one of whom was serving in the US Navy.
How far do people have to stretch to find reasons to go after McCain.
I agree. With this smarmy line of thinking, some of my friends who were born on US bases in Germany would be SOL. His parents were citizens and he was born on a US military base in a US territory - he can bloody well run for the presidency.
“Citizen at birth” and “natural born citizen” are not the same. You can’t be a “natural born” citizen of two different countries but you can have dual citizenship, unfortunately.
I don’t know how we ever allowed dual citizenship to happen in the US since our laws clearly require the applicant to “...doth absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty whatever, and particularly by name, the prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, whereof he was before a citizen or subject..”
Military installations on foreign soil are not U.S. territory.
Anyone born in the Zone or in Panama of at least one US parent is a US citizen.
§ 1403. Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904
I think common sense applies here. If someone is born to parents who just happen to be out of the country at the time, it’s absurd to think the Founding Fathers would disqualify that child from the presidency. That’s particularly true if the parents were serving our nation. McCain was born in the Canal Zone because his father was stationed there serving our country. The idea that McCain is disqualified from the presidency because of this is absurd. In any event, the Canal Zone was under the jurisdiction of the U.S government at the time so the issue is completely moot.
BTW, I think common sense equally applies to the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. It only applies to babies born to women who are legally entitled to be here. If a woman is illegally in the country, and gives birth, her baby should not be considered a citizen.
Get yourself up to date, Perchant.
Go here:
If you are interested about us “duals” and other interesting information, please go to: http://www.richw.org/dualcit/
“Dual Citizenship FAQ: Dual Nationality and United States Law”
by Rich Wales
Then go to the bottom of the page and click on “Go to next part (Questions and answers)” (http://www.richw.org/dualcit/faq.html).
You will find it an interesting read.
The canal zone was US territory until the Peanut gave it away.
In your lust to eliminate McCain's chances to be president of the United States, let's not step all over the men and women who serve this nation by disparaging the citizenship status of their children. Everyone of them has earned the right to be called citizen of the United States exponentially over any non-serving citizens and their proginy.
it’s time to stop embarassing yourself with posts highlighting your ignorance
This looks like the crud Hillary would come up with. The democRats tried to keep servicemen’s votes from counting in the last election. Now completely throw their children out?
Of course, McCain could go to Mexico and sneak back in ...
Not quite. Governmental control of the Canal Zone transferred to the Panama Canal Commission in 1979. US jurisdiction essentially ended at that point. Guardia National started doing the policing powers, and made a habit under Torrijos and Noriega of harrassing American military with traffic stops and other petty crap. Just let one tire wander over a yellow line way out in the boonies and you would be pulled over. A couple of dollars bribe would usually take care of it, but you had to be careful you weren't dealing with the one honest guy there.
Full control and turnover of all facilities, including the Canal, occured in 1999.
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.