Posted on 08/21/2020 11:08:54 AM PDT by CDR Kerchner
(Aug. 21, 2020) At approximately the 20-minute mark in his weekly update from August 14, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton touched on questions arising last week after former Vice President Joseph Biden announced California U.S. Senator Kamala Harris as his running mate in the November 3 presidential election.
Judicial Watch is a self-described conservative non-profit organization which frequently takes federal and local agencies to court over their refusal or failure to release government documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
The question of constitutional eligibility has become a subject which many in the mainstream media ridicule and attempt to silence without delving into the history or intended meaning of the Framers when they insisted that the president and commander-in-chief of the military be a natural born Citizen. That designation was mandated only for the nations chief executive, while members of Congress were required to simply be a citizen and resident in the state they wished to represent for a specific number of years.
Fitton referred to an article by Chapman University Professor of Law John Eastman which focused on the 14th Amendments citizenship provision and whether or not Harriss parents at the time of their daughters birth were lawful permanent residents as opposed to merely temporary visitors, perhaps on student visas issued pursuant to Section 101(15)(F) of Title I of the 1952 Immigration Act. ... continue reading at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2020/08/21/tom-fitton-questions-harriss-eligibility/
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Here is a link to a list and information about various candidates in both major political parties who have sought or are talked about who are not constitutionally eligible to serve in our highest national offices: https://www.scribd.com/lists/22182725/Some-Politicians-Seeking-High-Office-Who-Are-Not-A-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-U-S
What's your point here? You want to change the Constitution to make some more people ineligible? That's fine, advocate for that. It's got nothing to do with whatever it says now.
Who ever said all you needed to be was a citizen?
"Do you believe natural born citizen and citizen are one in the same? If so why the need for the exemption? They were all citizens at the time of the writing."
I already said. They were not natural born citizens because when they were born there was no USA to be born into. It had nothing to do with their parents.
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.