Posted on 07/27/2023 1:23:56 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Trevor Sutcliffe @TrevorSutcliffe
Vivek Ramaswamy is not legally eligible to be President. The natural born citizen clause predates the Fourteenth Amendment by several decades. He is a Fourteenth Amendment/Wong Kim Ark citizen, not a natural-born citizen. His campaign for the Presidency is illegitimate.
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
Where is the “Not this shit again” guy?
The 14th supersedes the clause in the original constitution.
Squirt away. I’m just telling you what the law is.
And you got it wrong, unless this law has somehow been rewritten !
It defines citizenship at birth. Nowhere in the constitution is there a definition of “Natural Born Citizen”.
We’re slaves Natural Born Citizens?
If not, Why not?
This was never brought up with Mike “I’m white” Dukakis, whose entire campaign was about being the “son of Greek immigrants.” As soon as the candidate is not lily white, you guys get all worked up.
The very case referenced by the OP is the definitive case on the matter. Wong Kim Ark.
Stop spouting ignorant nonsense.
The supreme court already ruled no one has standing to challenge this cause, so the point is moot.
The simple fact is that Citizenship at birth is defined by the 14th Amendment. That supersedes the common law interpretation in the Original Constitution.
Please provide a source document referencing how an amendment “superseds” the Constitution. I’ll wait..
A person born on US soil is a “citizen at birth”, true...regardless of origin of parents, but not catagorized as a “Natural Born Citizen”...Which requires two “Citizen Parents”.
I’ve cited the real law in this thread. Please point me to the “law” you refer to.
> So argue with them; not me. <
I don’t understand why you said that. I didn’t say you were wrong or the booklet was wrong. I just said that I had never seen it. But I did see the Supreme Court opinions on the matter. They are a convoluted mess.
No different than our 44th Indonesian president Barry Soetoro....
The supreme court already ruled no one has standing to challenge this cause, so the point is moot.
Case Number? I’d like to read the decision.
TOTALLY CORRECT-—
THANK HOWARD DEAN & PELOSI FOR THAT PARTICULAR FRAUD
NIKKI HALEY ALSO IS NOT ELIGIBLE.
IMO-—IT IS FRAUD FOR EITHER OF THEM TO COLLECT ONE PENNY IN “CAMPAIGN DONATIONS”.
NO THOSE ARE ANCHOR BABIES-—AND WE ALREADY HAVE MILLIONS OF THEM
So either the government printed booklet was in error, or you are wrong. The latter is the correct answer.
And yes, I saw this booklet, know the person who took and passed the test with flying colors, has been a citizen here for decades now, and is a CONSERVATIVE.
Multiple cases
CASE NO. 08-4340 was rejected by the Supreme Court
Charles Kerchner Jr vs. Barack Obama
I can’t recall the other ones, but it’s been challenged at least 3 times.
And show me where you come up with this imaginary difference between a “Natural Born Citizens” and someone “born a citizen”.
Please stop. This is turning into a clown show.
2 words: “No standing”
So? Neither was Kneepad Kammy or Obama.
NOT EXACTLY:
NATURAL BORN PERSON MUST BE BORN IN USA AFTER BOTH PARENTS ARE CITIZENS.
THIS IS PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE WHEN PARENTS CAME TO USA FROM OTHER COUNTRY
THEY CAN COME HERE—GET THEIR OWN CITIZENSHIP STATUS-—THEN HAVE A CHILD HERE-—THEN THAT CHILD WOULD BE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
IF PARENTS NOT USA CITIZENS WHEN CHILD IS BORN HERE—CHILD IS ANCHOR BABY
WE HAVE millions of anchor babies
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.