The problem with all of these arguments is that people self appoint as the arbiter and authority on the clause “Natural Born Citizen” as cited by the U.S. Constitution. Then they cite Vattel, they cite English common law, they cite Free Republic and proclaim that their particular version of what constitutes a natural born citizen is the only one that is correct.
Worth a bucket full of spit.
The Supreme Court has never issued a decision on the natural born citizen and they never will. The Court considers it a political matter and they are going to let the politicians sort it out. I expect to see my favorite SCOTUS citation on this thread, it always makes an apperance. That, of course, Minor v. Heppersett which has nothing to do with natural born citizen questions, but is about women’s suffrage. People need to learn how to read SCOTUS Opinions if they want to pretend that they are experts.
Harris will be eligible if she gets the nod for VP and if she appears on the ballot in all states. Get over it.
What is this Constitution thing you speak of?
“Harris will be eligible if she gets the nod for VP and if she appears on the ballot in all states. Get over it.”
No I won’t. This is an Article III matter COMPLETELY within the jurisdiction of SCOTUS to adjudicate. Given the ADDED danger of globalist impulses, I and others who share my opinion will not cease expressing our legitimate concerns and 1st amendment constitutional right to pressure competent authority to get the coward-ass SCOTUS to address this issue for the first time, and settle it IAW the original intent of the framers.
As Justice Clarence Thomas told Rep Jose Serrano in a House of Reps. Committee hearing, “We are avoiding that issue.”