Posted on 07/13/2019 9:52:40 AM PDT by CDR Kerchner
Senator Kamala Devi Harris (D-California) cannot become president unless she is a “natural born Citizen.” The U.S. Constitution contains few eligibility criteria for our nation’s highest post. But being born to the country is one of them. Since a vice president must be able to succeed to the presidency, Harris could not run as vice president, either.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 requires that only a natural born citizen can serve as president. The Constitution clearly distinguishes between a citizen and a “natural born Citizen.” There is a special case of citizen who is also natural born. An interesting but often-ignored requirement is that one must also have “been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” The intent indicates an attempt to ensure allegiance to the United States by a strong connection. This was the result of continued loyalties to the British Crown among Tories and others after the Revolutionary War, where some politicians even suggesting the nation should return to a limited monarchy. The Framers thus wanted to eliminate “family influences” among our presidents.
Some may think of the Fourteenth Amendment. Even if we ignore the requirement that a person born in the country must be “under the jurisdiction thereof,” the Constitution clearly recognizes that not all citizens are eligible to be president.
Both of Harris’s parents were present in the United States under student visas when Harris was born in Oakland, California. They were not U.S. citizens at that time. A student visa requires a non-immigrant intent. That is, one must swear that they have no intent to stay. Harris’ parents appear to have lied. …. continue reading at: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/klayman/190712
(Excerpt) Read more at renewamerica.com ...
Half the demonrat candidates aren’t eligible but they can claim precedent after the Kenyan.
Regardless of the law it often just becomes a slush fund for future use as desired.Rarely it becomes a subject of legal contention.
“Anyone know how someone’s eligibility is contested? I presume it’s in court and I presume whoever files must have standing. Would it be done via civil lawsuit or ?”
Yeah.
Anyone can contest it.
You can contest it.
“You can contest it.”
Not gonna happen.
Larry Klayman? Everyone should stop reading right there. Oh, and if you post a link to a Klayman fantasy, you need to be unceremoniously sterilized
True. Though I believe so many Americans learned how dangerous (and destructive) it was to have an ineligible occupant of the White House under the Obama regime, that the opposition to repeating that mistake will be immense -especially so soon — this I think soroznazi and his cronies will just select another far leftist extremist for the nomination, one not so burdened by the Obama “legacy”. We will see
With a compliant media she also glosses over the fact she’s not an “African-American.” Plus her parents were not citizens of this country when she was born. In addition her mother is 100% Hindu Indian. Her father is of mixed race from Jamaica, primarily caucasion. His white ancestors were slave owners in Jamaica. Her father’s grandfather is 100% white and her father has verified it. Her paternal ancestors are mostly white. This fraud should not be allowed to claim she’s a black-America. She’s no more black that Elizabeth Warren is Indian.
That’s all fine and dandy, but how are you going to enforce it?
It may well be enforceable for a GOP Candidate. But a demoncrap Candidate? Especially one of color? Fuggitaboutit.
In the discussion of Harris, the article does not say why she does not meet the natural born citizen test.
Did I miss it in the article?
“Her father is described as “an African-American from Jamaica.” Her mother Shyamala Gopalan was from India and graduated from the University of Delhi at nineteen. Her parents separated a few years after Harris was born and divorced when Harris was seven. Her mother entered the country only 4 years before Harris was born, and her father only 3 years before.”
Agree. Their are only two types of citizens, natural born or naturalized, there is no third type. Never even heard anyone suggest their was a third type until the whole Obama birther crap started. Obama was a horrible President and the most un-American President (because of his upbringing, not his race) we ever had. However, he was born in Hawaii to a mother who was a natural born citizen so that makes him a natural born citizen.
You forgot Bobbie Jindal.
It’s both Democratic, Republican, and Socialist party candidates. They all want to ignore the original intent, meaning, and understanding by the founders and framers of our Constitution the “natural born Citizen” term.
Some examples of politicians aspiring to high political office who are also not constitutionally eligible: Kamala Harris (D), Ted Cruz (R), Marco Rubio (R), Nikki Haley (R), and Bobby Jindal (R) are not a “natural born Citizen” of the U.S. to constitutional standards.
For more about “natural born Citizen” - read, download, and print a PDF copy of this White Paper by CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) about the “natural born Citizen” term and presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution here: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/The-Who-What-When-Where-Why-and-How-of-NBC-Term-in-Constitution.pdf
Thanks CDR Kerchner. Neither one is fit for office, regardless.
I posted about Gabbard a month so ago. Her mother was US when Gabbard was born in Samoa. But all i could find about her father was he was US citizen, but that was a statement when he was a congressman from hawaii. Can’t find the father’s status when Gabbard was born in Samoa.
Thank you for this post and for keeping this important issue front and center.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that it was "never doubted" that natural born citizens are those born in the U.S. of U.S. citizen parents. Minor v. Happersett, 88 US 162, 167 (1875).
This is a red flag. Everyone one who cites Minor v. Happersett does not know what they are talking about. Everything thereafter in his article is nonsense and can be ridiculed at will.
You see, Minor v. Happersett was a case that had nothing to do with citizenship, natural born or otherwise. It was a case about sufferage. Minor was a female U.S. Citizen who wanted to vote. Her state said no, pointed out that State Law gave the vote to only males.
Not only did the case have nothing to do with citizenship, the Supreme Court said that it was perfectly constitutional for her state to deny her the vote. So, when you see anyone throw Minor v. Happersett on the table, you can be sure that you are dealing with one of the clueless.
Here is an article which further explains why Kamala Harris is not constitutionally a “natural born Citizen”. She was born with triple Citizenship and allegiance since her parents were Citizens of other nations when she was born and thus Kamala was born with multiple Citizen and attendant allegiance requirements to those foreign countries when she was born. The commander in chief must have sole allegiance at birth to only the USA. That is the purpose of the “natural born Citizen” term as suggested by John Jay to George Washington. See: https://www.scribd.com/document/385966818/Senator-Kamala-Harris-Not-a-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-USA-to-Constitutional-Standards
Larry Klayman should go after BO, too! BO’s entire life is full of questions and controversies!
You are right, I did.
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.