A Hint of New Life to a McCain Birth Issue

New York Times ^ | July 11, 2008 | Adam Liptak

[reaganaut1]

In the most detailed examination yet of Senator John McCain’s eligibility to be president, a law professor at the University of Arizona has concluded that neither Mr. McCain’s birth in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone nor the fact that his parents were American citizens is enough to satisfy the constitutional requirement that the president must be a “natural-born citizen.”

The analysis, by Prof. Gabriel J. Chin, focused on a 1937 law that has been largely overlooked in the debate over Mr. McCain’s eligibility to be president. The law conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904, and it made John McCain a citizen just before his first birthday. But the law came too late, Professor Chin argued, to make Mr. McCain a natural-born citizen.

“It’s preposterous that a technicality like this can make a difference in an advanced democracy,” Professor Chin said. “But this is the constitutional text that we have.”

[Congressman Billybob]

Precisely my thought. The question of Obama's constitutional legitimacy has been discussed in media in Israel and England, and in the blogosphere in the US. Yet, somehow, the vast network of fact-gathering which is the NY Times has not noticed that whole subject.

I'm sure they will discover the subject next week, and will cover Obama's birth credentials. NOT.

BTW, the error in the Professor's article which a competent reporter would have picked up is the doctrine of post hoc validity. Sometimes a law is passed not to create a legal fact but to clarify a legal fact from the past.

That's what was done about a decade ago when a lawyer died and they found in his records about a thousand divorce decrees that had never been filed. That meant all those people, many who had since been remarried, were never legally divorced.

The appropriate court then entered a post hoc degree, validating all those divorces from the beginning. What a court can do with the law, a legislature can also do. As I understand the 1937 federal law is it "recognized" the native birth of all Americans born in the Canal Zone after 1904, when Roosevelt began the construction of the Canal.

So, when the Professor's rather obvious error is corrected. there is no question that McCain is a "native-born" American.

Can we move on, now, to the other candidate with a birth-right problem? You know, the Obama guy? The one whose nuts Jesse Jackson threatened to remove? It was in all the papers (but not in the NY Times).

Congressman Billybob

First in the series, "American Government: The Owner's Manual"

[Miss Didi]

I agree, pre-emptive strike! Great find, Mom...love this part:

"How can Americans continue to have confidence in mainstream media if these media are, as Rush Limbaugh suggests, on a mission from God to anoint Obama as a political messiah?"

[Miss Didi]

Thought you kids might find this interesting. The plot thickens...

[Miss Didi]

An excellent point! I made a $50 bet with my daughter during Operation Chaos that the Clintons would never let this novice become the RAT nominee. Of course she would like me to pay-up now but I refuse until after the August convention. One underestimates the Clintons at ones own peril.

Clinton Inc. CEO, Howard Wolfson, made his debut on Fox this morning spinning for Barry. Such a phony--I think it's all for show until Mrs. Clinton swipes the nomination. I predict first week of August...something will emerge. Bigtime.

[CowboyJay]

"Mitt and Rudy may be the only guys who make McCain look good"

Agreed. Bad as McCain is, he is still marginally to the right of Romney on most issues. Romney is not conservative by any definition I'm familiar with.

[Miss Didi]

Mitt and Rudy both made excellent appearances on Fox & Friends this week...Mitt so charming and sharp and Rudy on the attack against the Messiah. Wish they were out there every day.

[retrokitten]

When I saw your ping, I thought it was going to be from Huffington Post or something equally stupid, so I guess I wasn’t wrong.

This whole thing is so dumb. Does this mean that all children of our servicemen and women who are born on foreign bases are not citizens?? Of course not. This is such a non-issue. Leave it to the NYT to make a big deal out of nothing.

[Jim Noble]

Gee, why are they not talking about you know who?

Because he was born in Hawaii.

[Zevonismymuse]

I would conservatively estimate that at least 75% of this country's news reporters, editors, producers and directors intend to vote for Obambi, and that number might be as high as 90% by November.

I think the number of media folks who voted for Clinton was 87% so I agree with you that Obama will be at least that high. Why isn't that story part of the 24/7 obsession with His Highness?

[antiRepublicrat]

What law overrode the 1790 law saying all children born to two citizen parents “beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens”?

[retrokitten]

I sometimes read Gawker.com, they are very lefty, but if they stay away from politics, they are really funny. That make fun of Wolfson all the time. Here's a post about him and it has this comment from The Economist:

"...Howard Wolfson (one of the least helpful spokesmen this newspaper has ever encountered)..."

[Miss Didi]

Funny stuff..."the oft-sweatered Howard Wolfson."

[olivia3boys]

It’s starting to look like NEITHER Obama NOR McCain are “natural born citizens.”

[kitkat]

***Alternately- is the NYT’s getting ready to lower the boom on Obama’s questionable documentation of his birth?***

Only if HItlery has enough on the Times to force them to run a hit piece on Barry Hussein.

[spacejunkie]

I wrote the author as well. I implore every one of us to tell him to do the same level of research and reporting on Obama.

[Miss Didi]

Only if HItlery has enough on the Times to force them to run a hit piece on Barry Hussein.

It was indeed the Times who endorsed Mrs. Clinton instead of the Messiah.

[Ol' Sparky]

Wonderful! Neither McCain nor Obama were born in this country. Let’s throw both out and pick new nominees!

[Libertarianize the GOP]

Both Article II Section 1 and Amendment XII of the US Constitution call for President of the Senate to count the electors vote. There are procedures for congress to make the choice if no one has a majority, therefore the constitutionally correct place to challenge the eligibility of a Presidential candidate who has won a majority of the vote would be in congress. It is not spelled out but if a challenge were made at the time the electors’ votes are counted the Senate would probably have to vote on the issue. Evidence would be presented and testimony heard, then a decision would have to be made. There is nothing in the Constitution giving the courts authority to make the decision; lawyers think the courts are always the place for making decisions so they don’t think of other options that would probably fit better with the structure of the Constitution. It does not matter whether the challenge is to the election of McCain, Obama or anyone else, the process would be the same. Another possibility would be to use the procedures for impeachment after Congress certifies the election results, since running for office in violation of the constitutional requirement for being a natural born citizen would be high Crime or Misdemeanor.

[DBrow]

“Does this mean we can get Mitt Romney back in there?”

Well, I dunno, wasn’t Willard’s dad born in...MEXICO?

lol

[piytar]

“Regardless of whatever straws they are grasping at, the Senate passed a resolution that acknowledged McCain as a natural born citizen.”

Good point, but unfortunately irrelevant to the purpose of the hit piece. They know full well that McCain isn’t going to be disqualified from running. What they want to do is create a doubt about the Constitutionality of him running because that might help turn off a few more conservative voters...