Posted on 01/21/2019 12:25:55 PM PST by research99
Monday, January 21, 2019, California Senator Kamala Devi Harris announced her candidacy for the 2020 Presidential election.
Outstanding questions pertaining to her candidacy include her eligibility for this office. The US Constitution specifies only a "natural born" US citizen may hold this post. Definitions of that term, according to the intent of the writers of the Constitution, as well as some later court rulings, indicate this means "born to two US citizen parents." The requirement was intended so that only someone with undivided loyalties to the US, someone not with possible divided loyalties to other nations, could assume the title of commander-in-chief of our armed forces.
“No, she is not going to be ruled a British citizen. She was born in California and the law of the land long before she was born was that she is a citizen.”
There is no law making children born to legal or illegal foreign nationals U.S. citizens at birth.
Have a look at the image. It is verifiable via ancestry.com
(The name and birthdate have been verified via other documents connected to the Harris family).
Can someone locate Donald Harris’ “alien file” with the USCIS, or his British passport file?
The Democrats are in for a grievance campaign with this one. Don’t vote for the candidate because she has shown herself to be a wise and good leader, oh no, vote for her because those mean nasty deplorables have attacked her and what could possibly be more qualifying for elevation to the highest office in the land than a campaign that boils down to “people were mean to me so give me what I want.”
Obama was born a British subject and all of our elected and appointed clapped like trained seals.
Another friggin’ African pretending to be born in the U.S.
She was born in the continental U.S. and this went through in the 1800’s after the founders died. This is nothing more than an attempt to replicate Obama’s rise for Kamala. Just watch and see if I’m not right.
Citizen is not the requirement as a simple reading of Art.II Sec. 1 reveals.
“The SC would”
I would be very surprised if they would ‘rule’ correctly on this issue. That would mean invalidating Hussein Osama.
I apologize but I cannot make out most of the image although I do see British.
What I fear is another birther scene which was always just a smokescreen. All we need is her parents citizenship at birth. If not American citizens then no natural born status. The same reason Obama was ineligible.
In your document can you see parents citizenship?
You know. We have 330 million friggin’ Americans in this country. Why the hell do we need to elect freeloading, America haters to our government? What the hell has this ho ever done for America? It’s time to unlegalize all the recreational drugs until the morons living here can get their heads screwed back on straight.
U.S. citizenship is determined solely by U.S. law and court rulings. British or any other law has no bearing on how U.S. law defines citizenship.
As long as both her parents were resident aliens or in the process of becoming naturalized citizens, then under U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, Harris is a natural born citizen.
Regardless of who the Democrats pick, I'm looking forward to Trump's 2nd term.
The difference between Harris and Obama is, the campaign announcement has just been made and there hasn’t been a complete purge of related documents.
There are more in hand, but we’re holding some details back to
total scrub. As mentioned, the 1971 divorce complaint has already disappeared (although a reference to a settlement referencing an offshore bank account in the Bahamas did survive).
Other information, such as Donald Harris’s work involving foreign affairs and the Ford Foundation, and residences in the District of Columbia and Florida, point to other potential complications.
Oh, I say. Pip, pip and all that sort of rot. Eh, what?
The issue is never where the parents were born. Donald Trump's mother was foreign born.
The issue is what was the citizenship status of her parents at the time of her birth? Whether you believe the narrow or broad definition of natural born citizen, the birthplace of the parent was never a consideration.
To begin the naturalization process, a person must be a permanent resident (green card holder) for five years in order to be eligible to apply. For Harris, here parents were not here for the required five years when she was born so could not have begun the naturalization process, and they likely held student visas for the few years they were in graduate school.
-PJ
http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html
Wong determined citizen, not natural born citizen.
The correct Supreme Court reference is Minor vs Happersett
as of 2008 that law no longer applies. The DC establishment knew the Obozo wasn't legally eligible to be president put they allowed him into the WH anyway. Research this; The DNC changed the Obozo's submitted presidential eligibility form by rewording a couple of questions that addressed his eligibility. Essentially the form did not declare his legal eligibility. To the county's detriment, the form was accepted by the Federal Election Commission without question. Deep State strikes again!
and it forced the senate to issue a resolution (not worth a bucket of spit) that McCain is eligible.
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/us/politics/01citizen.html
I’m thinking we hammer Harris on this anyway, just to get the senate to act again...
but we wont. We just don’t play like the RATs.
Obama was born a British subject....
Agree wholeheartedly, but all I needed to disqualify him was his fathers citizenship.
It was sickening to watch our “leaders” look the other way. I believe it was done on purpose to destroy the NBC.
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.