Constitutional Eligibility
Posted on 08/15/2020 2:35:33 PM PDT by Ennis85
Well, that didn’t take long.
A non-White American citizen born right here in the United States has gotten a spot on the Democratic presidential ticket, and the birthers have come scurrying out from whatever rock they have been living under since Barack Obama left office.
Within hours of former vice president Joe Biden’s announcement Wednesday of his history-making running mate, once-reputable Newsweek posted a story posing “Some Questions for Kamala Harris About Eligibility.”
The author, John Eastman, a conservative law professor, wrote that “some” are “questioning” whether Harris might be “constitutionally ineligible” to be vice president because, should she have to step into the presidency, she might not meet the Constitution’s Article II requirement that this country’s chief executive be a “natural born” citizen.
Jenna Ellis, who appears frequently these days on cable television as a “senior legal adviser” to the Trump campaign, quickly embraced this nontroversy, retweeting a link to Eastman’s article and later declaring Harris’s eligibility an “open question.” So we are left to assume that the president’s reelection campaign is on board with this line of inquiry, which is reminiscent of President Trump’s own leadership of the “birther” movement when it was first launched against Obama.
Harris is the daughter of immigrants. Her father (from Jamaica) and her mother (from India) were not citizens at the time of her birth in 1964. A birth that — Have I mentioned this? Stay with me here, because this is important — happened in Oakland, Calif., which was then and is now in the United States of America. That means Harris was a U.S. citizen from the first second of her life.
The theoretical and esoteric question of whether first-generation Americans are eligible to be president is booted around from time to time in law-professor circles.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
“That has all been wiped away now by Congressional Declaration which seems a slippery way to amend the Constitution.”
No, Congress cannot amend the Constitution. And yes, Congress affirmed the natural born language when it took the effort to assure us that McCain was natural born.
Yes. The Constitution identifies two types of citizenship: natural born and naturalized. If you're not one then you're the other.
“No, that is not what natural born means or ever meant.”
Yes, it does. That Naturalization Act of 1790, passed by Congress, defines natural born directly as being offspring of citizen parents.
“...nobody would have been eligible for the next 35 years.”
Those were grandfathered in.
Constitutional Eligibility
“That is your opinion. Held by very few.”
The idea that natural born meant being born from citizen parents was the doctrine of the entire country for hundreds of years, right up until Obama became president. Why do you think the pejorative term “birther” was implemented?
No it doesn't. It mentions only children born overseas and only if the father had at some time resided in the U.S. - Link
It was also superceded by multiple later pieces of legislation.
You'd be surprised.
As well as the NBC status of Panamaian (not in the Canal Zone, but in Panama proper!) born McCain.
“So - If an expecting Canadian or Mexican couple have their baby while visiting America, it will be a natural born American citizen.”
Unfortunately that is the case according to current interpretation and implementation.
In this example, which I think is bad policy and not what was meant to happen under the 14th Amendment, the baby could lose US citizenship if he were taken back to his parents country and did not live in the US for a given amount of time. But I think that can happen even to someone born in the US to two citizens.
Wikipedia informed, and now part of the problem. Thanks.
Karen Tumulty, reliable Democrap journowhore...
Both parents must be U.S. citizens at the time of your birth.End of story.
The Law of Nations is another name for International Law. United States citizenship is decided by U.S. law.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401
8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birthThe following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 1, §?301, 66 Stat. 235; Pub. L. 89–770, Nov. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 1322; Pub. L. 92–584, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 Stat. 1289; Pub. L. 95–432, §§?1, 3, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1046; Pub. L. 99–653, §12, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3657; Pub. L. 103–416, title I, § 101(a), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4306.)
Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
At 169 U.S. 688:
This sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment is declaratory of existing rights, and affirmative of existing law, as to each of the qualifications therein expressed—" born in the United States," "naturalized in the United States," and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof "—in short, as to everything relating to the acquisition of citizenship by facts occurring within the limits of the United States. But it has not touched the acquisition of citizenship by being born abroad of American parents; and has left that subject to be regulated, as it had always been, by Congress, in the exercise of the power conferred by the Constitution to establish an uniform rule of naturalization.The effect of the enactments conferring citizenship on foreign-born children of American parents has been defined, and the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the dominion of the United States, notwithstanding alienage of parents, has been affirmed, in well considered opinions of the executive departments of the Government, since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
Just to be clear, your assertion is based on your interpretation, and wishful thinking.
The Constitution does not make that a requirement, the current laws do not make that a requirement, Congress did not make that a requirement and the SCOTUS has ruled that is not a requirement.
Tumulty misspelled "flushed that lying, purple-lipped Halfrican turd down the porcelain throne"...
“Harris is the daughter of immigrants. Her father (from Jamaica) and her mother (from India) were not citizens at the time of her birth in 1964.”
JamIndian, or JamCanIndian.
“Both parents must be U.S. citizens at the time of your birth.
End of story.”
The father of Chester A. Arthur, 21st president, was not a U.S. Citizen at the time of Arthur’s birth. He didn’t become a citizen until 17 years after Arthur’s birth.
When Arthur ran for VP and later became President after Garfield’s assassination his eligibility was challenged, but not on the basis his father wasn’t a citizen when he was born but based on claims he was born outside the U.S.
That one has an agenda.
“When the child is born on US soil the citizenship of the parents is irrelevant.”
"Why does the Constitution specify “natural born” regarding requirements to be president, if it were irrelevant?"
That's quite a leap you made there. "natural born" says nothing about the citizenship of the parents.
Nope. You got that out of context. That's the part where they are talking about children born outside the US, not about children born inside the US. If inside the US, the parents don't matter.
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.