Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DMZFrank
"The 14th amendment did not alter or modify the meaning of Article II, section 1, clause 5 with regard to the POTUS eligibility requirement in any way, shape form or fashion.

Conflating the two does not create a constitutional amendment that would actually do so."

I didn't mention the 14th, or conflate it. Even before the 14th, being born in the US would make one a natural born citizen. That's what it always meant.

200 posted on 01/22/2019 9:36:56 PM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies ]


To: mlo

Again, the only relevant question here is NOT strictly speaking, NBC. Indians born in the US under tribal jurisdiction were not citizens until 1924, EVEN after passage of the 14th amendment. The question is what the framers intended NBC to mean with regard to eligibility for assuming the office of POTUS. NBC has no other constitutional applicability. Most importantly, the SCOTUS has never directly ruled on this issue.

The framers themselves were not NBC’s. They had to install a grandfather clause in Article II to make themselves eligible to the presidency, even though they founded the nation and won it’s revolution.

Think of all trees being plants, but not all plants are trees.


202 posted on 01/23/2019 6:38:15 AM PST by DMZFrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson