Replies

You’re constructing a theoretical fiction in order to make what is in reality a messy situation “simple”.

Horsepucky. The author of the 14th Amendment stated as fact "every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen." He wasn't wrong and none disputed him. I don't know why you'd want to believe him a liar. Nothing short of a Constitutional Amendment can change our Constitution. For some reason you want to believe your son is not a natural born citizen. Okay, that's your choice, and you should live as you believe.

Canada still recognized (and recognizes) her as a citizen

We, the United States of America, don't care what Canada recognizes. How many times have I said that. They have no more legislative authority inside our borders than we have inside theirs. Your wife swore an oath to the United States and renounced her citizenship in Canada. But for some reason you want to believe she never for a moment possessed a pure allegiance to the United States, even though she raised her hand and swore to that very thing. Okay, that's your choice, and again you should live as you believe.

Would an American born in the United States to two U.S. citizens who had at some point in their life acquired Israeli citizenship be eligible for the Presidency?

Simple question, simple answer : Was the child within the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of his birth with parents having a pure allegiance to the United States? If yes, then he was born a natural born citizen and his parents' actions thereafter arguably cannot take that distinction away from him. Though he might have to deal with their shortsightedness when he comes of age if they do later exercise dual citizenship. It's so simple, that it's elegant. Our Founding generations were clearly more wise than we are today.

You misunderstood my “simple” question: if a child born in the United States to two United States citizens, neither of whom is a dual citizen, and the child subsequently (presumably as an adult) acquires dual citizenship, would that person when they attained the age of 35 be eligible to run for President?

For the record, I’m not trying to argue that my son is not a natural born citizen. He was born a citizen, thus he’s a natural born citizen. My argument is that by complicating the question with whether or not his parents were citizens at the time of his birth, you accomplish very little in terms of protecting the Presidency against foreign allegiances and you sacrifice quite a bit in terms of maintaining a bright line rule that can withstand the left’s assault against the Constitution and national sovereignty.

That said, I do think that the 14th Amendment should not be interpreted to grant citizenship at birth to just anyone who is born here, as has been the interpretation. We know it doesn’t grant citizenship to the children of diplomats because they have not subjected themselves to our jurisdiction, I would say the same should apply to illegal aliens and/or probably temporary non-immigrant visa holders as well. That’s a tangent, but it impacts the question of who would be a “citizen at birth” so it’s relevant.