Funny, I didn't see that in FactCheck's sister publication:
The Constitution doesn’t recognize ‘naturalized citizens of the United States.
The Constitution recognizes TWO types of citizens:
Natural born citizens of the United States
and
Citizens of the United States
Is there a place in the Constitution that says ‘naturalized citizens of the United States’ cannot be President? No, there isn’t.
Article II, Section 1:
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
Unless a ‘citizen of the United States’ was around at the time the Constitution was adopted, they cannot serve as President today.
Our Founding Fathers were ‘citizens of the United States’. They made provisions for themselves to be able to serve as President but that provision expired long ago. James Buchanan was the first President that had to be a natural born citizen in order to serve as President.
The 14th Amendment ONLY defines ‘Citizens of the United States’. It doesn’t not define ‘Naturalized citizens of the United States’. A person that goes through the naturalization process is considered a ‘citizen of the United States’.
Let’s say this. Everyone that is a ‘citizen of the United States’ gets a blue sticker.
Everyone that is a natural born citizen gets a red sticker.
Arnold gets a blue sticker. He is a citizen of the United States because he was naturalized here. He is NOT a ‘naturalized citizen of the United States’. The 14th Amendment says anyone naturalized in the United States is a ‘citizen of the United States’.
Anchor Baby (provided his parents aren’t foreign diplomats, enemies of the US, or native Indians) gets a blue sticker. Wong Kim Ark was a ‘citizen of United States’ by virtue of being born on US soil.
Barack gets a blue sticker. He is a citizen of the United States because he was born on US soil to a British Subject and a US citizen.
This is from FactCheck:
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…”
Please read the last line. How can a Natural born citizen’s status be ‘governed’ by Great Britain?
“Please read the last line. How can a Natural born citizen’s status be ‘governed’ by Great Britain?”
Why should we care whether the United Kingdom’s laws address the progeny of it’s colonials? We fought two wars with them and made it quite clear we were not subject to their jurisdiction. Why would you assume we’re forced to succumb to it because some pasty-faced socialist gets enough votes in Whitehall to pass a bill about their own business?
“The Constitution doesn’t recognize ‘naturalized citizens of the United States.”
Yes it does. Please reread the 14th amendment. It uses the word “naturalized” to refer to citizens who become citizens after their birth.
“The Constitution recognizes TWO types of citizens:
Natural born citizens of the United States
and
Citizens of the United States”
That is correct, i suppose. Naturalized citizens are on an equal footing with all other citizens, except in regards to the presidency, which requires you be born a citizen. So, in that sense, there are two types of citizens: those who can be president and those who can’t.
“Is there a place in the Constitution that says ‘naturalized citizens of the United States’ cannot be President? No, there isn’t.”
Of course there is, and you go on to quote it presently. The Constitution says that to be president, you have to be a natural born citizen. If you were naturalized, then by definition you were not born a citizen, and are therefore not a natural born citizen.
“Unless a ‘citizen of the United States’ was around at the time the Constitution was adopted, they cannot serve as President today.”
I cannot make sense of this sentence. The exception you refer to was created to grant the founding generation presidential elligibility. This was necessary because they were all older than the United States, and as such could not be natural born citizens. Everyone born a citizen after the passage of the 14th amendment, on the other hand, is in fact a natural born citizen, in my view.
“The 14th Amendment ONLY defines ‘Citizens of the United States’. It doesn’t not define ‘Naturalized citizens of the United States’. A person that goes through the naturalization process is considered a ‘citizen of the United States’.”
It does indeed define citizens of the U.S., including people born as citizens of the U.S., who are, by extension of my logic, natural born citizens.
“Everyone that is a natural born citizen gets a red sticker.”
And how do you pick which citizens get to wear a red sticker? Does a genie tell you something about Article II, Section I that I don’t know?
“Anchor Baby (provided his parents aren’t foreign diplomats, enemies of the US, or native Indians) gets a blue sticker. Wong Kim Ark was a ‘citizen of United States’ by virtue of being born on US soil.
Barack gets a blue sticker. He is a citizen of the United States because he was born on US soil to a British Subject and a US citizen.”
Why do they get blue stickers? Please tell me what part of the Constitution denies them red stickers.
“Please read the last line. How can a Natural born citizen’s status be ‘governed’ by Great Britain?”
Uh, I’m not responsible for FactCheck’s language. I suppose it’s perfectly fine to say that Great Britain “governs” how they view Obama’s citizenship status, just as the U.S. governs its own business. The U.S. government doesn’t care who the Brits recognize. We take care of our own, thank you very much.
Gently: Obama, Ayers and FactCheck all have ties to Annenberg and to each other. Not a credible source.
Funny, I didn't see that in FactCheck's sister publication: