Posted on 07/09/2011 8:40:03 AM PDT by freespirited
Conservatives are right to be deeply committed to constitutionalism and to test all government actions against the plumb line of that great charter of liberty. We would never dismiss concerns about the constitutionality of legislation or the eligibility of persons to hold office under that Constitution the way former Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed objections to the legitimacy of ObamaCare. The former Speaker looked incredulously at her questioner and said: "Are you serious?" Happily, such disdain for constitutional concerns is one reason why she is the former Speaker of the House.
Don't worry, dear readers -- be happy. The good news for us is that Sen. Marco Rubio is eligible to be elected president in 2012. And so are Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley. There's been a lot of attention devoted to the original meaning of "natural born citizen of the United States," the governing phrase from Art. II, Sec. 1 of the Constitution. Happily, The Heritage Guide to the Constitution resolves this question for us.
Clearly, says this respected source, what the Founders sought to avoid was foreign intrigue, or intriguers, becoming president. Wise Founders. (Too bad they didn't also say "Marxists need not apply.")
The Guide cites the estimable John Jay, our first Chief Justice, who during the Constitutional Convention wrote to George Washington in 1787 to urge that "a strong check [be included] to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen." (Don't you love how Jay capitalizes Citizen?)
Do you have to be born within the territorial limits of the United States to be such a citizen? No, said the Founders. The Heritage Foundation's Guide shows how the First Congress in 1790 provided that "the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born." This was our first naturalization statute (1 Stat. 104). This Congress contained many Members, notably James Madison himself, who had just framed the Constitution in Philadelphia.
To provide a further check on foreign intrigue, the Founders specified that a person must have been "fourteen years a Resident within the United States." Why was that necessary?
Author David McCullough provides the answer -- although that was not his purpose-in his latest smash bestseller, The Greater Journey: Americans in Paris. McCullough describes John Singer Sargent, the famous American painter. Sargent had been born in Rome to American expatriate parents. Young Sargent lived in Europe and never visited the U.S. until 1876. His wealthy mother brought him to the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia when he was 19 years old.
Could such an expatriate "natural born Citizen" become president? Not unless he returned to the U.S. and lived here 14 years, the Founders wisely provided. John Singer Sargent painted the powerful portrait of Theodore Roosevelt that today hangs in the White House, but he could not have run for the office himself.
The Founders were serious about American identity and the integrity of republican principles. It was an incredible blessing to us that George and Martha Washington had no children of their marriage. Washington had referred to this fact in the first draft of his Inaugural Address. There would be no danger of monarchy here, he said, because he had "no child for whom I could wish to make provision -- no family to build in greatness upon my country's ruin."
Now, consider Marco Rubio. His parents were resident aliens when he was born in 1971, seeking and soon to receive their status as naturalized U.S. citizens. Under the Fourteenth Amendment, "all persons born...in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the states wherein they reside." This "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause shows why Rubio is -- and, very likely, why children of illegal aliens are not -- a "natural born citizen of the United States."
We should be very careful in discussions of the Constitution to avoid the impression that we are an anti-immigrant party. To say that Rubio, Jindal, and Haley are forever barred because of a strained interpretation of the Constitution's eligibility clause would condemn conservatism to minority status for the foreseeable future. Surely, that is not what we want.
Let's remember Ronald Reagan's beautiful Farewell Address. He spoke of Vietnamese Boat People in the South China Sea.
... the sailor was hard at work on the carrier Midway, which was patrolling the South China Sea. The sailor, like most American servicemen, was young, smart, and fiercely observant. The crew spied on the horizon a leaky little boat. And crammed inside were refugees from Indochina hoping to get to America. The Midway sent a small launch to bring them to the ship and safety. As the refugees made their way through the choppy seas, one spied the sailor on deck, and stood up, and called out to him. He yelled, "Hello, American sailor. Hello, freedom man."
Today, Marco Rubio is a freedom man. So are Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley a freedom man and woman. We should be proud to have any of these children of exiles as our president.
Is rubio from kenya?
I thought he was married.
You dont really know anything about these people except they are minorities and talk a tough conservative line and in their first year(s) of elected office
pandering to racial minorities and social liberal groups - what a dangerous way to select a leader (ala Mike Steele) or worse, a president, as falling for obama shows
Jindal seems like a nice competent adminstrator but can’t string together a public address with any passion, to save his life. They wont vote for you if you put them to sleep. What does Niki Haley’s experience have to do with facing down a China/Russia alliance in the next decade and dealing with the US congress over ruinous debt and the continued liberal co-optation of the USSC as a 3rd ruling-by-decree branch of govt?
Rubio? Handsome young guy with charisma. Like Scott Brown? Remember him? Who really knows Rubio under life-or-death decisionmaking pressure?
How about a color blind selection process for a seasoned leader.
No more GOP pandering - “we have a minority candidate too!”
Let the BEST MAN (or WOMAN) lead
really
Chet Arthur is delusional. The term Natural Born Citizen is and has always been accepted to be a person born in the US of two US citizen parents. The 14th Ammemdment does not address Natural Born. It specifically addresses Native Born which is not the same thing. As far as being born out of the country as long as you are born on soil that is under the jurisdiction of the US you may still be considered Natural Born. ie. John McCain.
Actually Marco Rubio may fit the definition of Natural Born due to the fact that his parents were born in 1930 and 1931 in Cuba when it was a territory of the US. Cuban independence came in 1932. Since Rubio was born in the US it could probably be construed that he is eligible to run for President. Bobby Jindal and Nicki Haley are not.
Barack Obama is a tragic mistake that must never be allowed to happen again. Under no definition is he Natural Born. He is Native Born and not eligible to be President.
Clearly this author does not have a law degree from Birther University. Undoubtedly, he will soon be emailed all the pertinent de Vattel musings to set him straight.
Hey Chet!!
I call BS!!!
“How about a color blind selection process for a seasoned leader.”
I thought that’s why we went with Dole and McCain.
Thanks for a really good post.
Sir,
I think you have hit the nail squarely on the head.
Ah but McCain played the minority card with a woman for VP
Got more than he expected, though!
Dole was a war hero, great guy. A quiet leader, very self effacing. Kinda like Boner except Boner never led men in war and it shows now.
Maybe we ran the wrong Dole, Libby had more charisma and she was tough, too.
“Maybe we ran the wrong Dole, Libby had more charisma and she was tough, too.”
Agreed, but my point is that, like Bush, we can not surmise exactly where someone will end up on an issue simply by their length of experience. Palin, Rubio, Jindal and Haley all have executive experience. If you see color and gender it’s in your glasses.
We know more about Palin than any other candidate in history. I’m expecting the lab results this week. (Although we were treated to Reagan’s colonoscopy results once or twice.) And we’ll know plenty about the others by election day.
Romney is enough of a minority candidate. My problem with the “color-blind “line, though, is that it is usually a mask for the view that WASP candidates ought to be the norm. Northern WASPs at that.
I suspect that if Romney is nominated, Rubio will be his nominee for VP. Makes sense politically and geographically, as well as ethnically. In addition, Rubio has the tongue, and that’s something Romney will need.
McCain played the minority card? Women are 50.7% of the population.
Oh and by the way, the only reason we got Dole and McCain is that the Republican party loves to play the war hero card. I respect a man’s service, but Kerry served also. It’s not an indication of how he will lead or what direction he’ll take once he’s back in civies.
If we like Christie are we playing the fat card? You probably need to get that prescription checked.
So when will the freeper who claims that Cubans are US Citizens come to explain why naturalization was required of Marco's parents?
How many WASPs immigrate to the US?
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.