[Radix]

Wrong.

The criteria is “natural born” citizen. Both parents must be citizens at the time of birth with a waiver for persons who were alive at the time of the Constitution being written.

If Obama were more than 200 years old he might qualify there, but not if he were a citizen of Indonesia or Kenya, or even England.

The "place" of birth is not relevant.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

The criteria is “natural born” citizen. Both parents must be citizens at the time of birth with a waiver for persons who were alive at the time of the Constitution being written. If Obama were more than 200 years old he might qualify there, but not if he were a citizen of Indonesia or Kenya, or even England. The "place" of birth is not relevant.

Is that so? Wow, I guess I must have been wrong....

Except I can't help but think there's this funny little thing called the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Now it's all fine and dandy to be an originalist -- I'm one myself -- but of course, even originalists agree that our original Constitution AND all its amendments are valid. Now my version of the 14th Amendment says, in the very first sentence:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

So at least according to that particular scrap of paper, if you're born in the United States, you are a citizen of the United States (and not a naturalized one, either, because they're mentioned separately). So can you please explain again how "the place of birth is not relevant?"

[mlo]

"Both parents must be citizens at the time of birth with a waiver for persons who were alive at the time of the Constitution being written."

The Constitution does not say that.