“Funny that, that you would specifically include only Democrats/liberals.”
You said that I only cited liberal democrats law review articles on Minor v. Happersett.
So cite other law review articles that claim Minor v. happersett is binding precedent.
As to your question:
Of the Constitutional amendments proposed only 1 deals with the definition of natural born citizen (S.2128 by Republican Senator Don Nickles). And it says,
“(a) IN GENERAL- Congress finds and declares that the term `natural born Citizen’ in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States means—
(1) any person born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; and
(2) any person born outside the United States—
(A) who derives citizenship at birth from a United States citizen parent or parents pursuant to an Act of Congress; or
(B) who is adopted by 18 years of age by a United States citizen parent or parents who are otherwise eligible to transmit citizenship to a biological child pursuant to an Act of Congress.”
The rest are attempts to allow naturalized citizens to be eligible to the Presidency, they are currently excluded. Those don’t try to change the definition of “natural born citizen”.
The last effort by Sen. McCaskill is not an amendment but a bill. It would make child born overseas to US Military personnel to be included in the term “natural born Citizen”. It doesn’t say anything about children born in the United States. It would clear up cases like Senator John McCain.
BTW, they don’t mention Sen. Hatch’s 2004 amendment S.R. 15 which would also allow naturalized citizens to be President. It is sometimes referred to as the Schwarzenegger Amendment.
Let's review that reply...
IINM,since the 1960’s, no law review article on Presidential eligiblity (Gordon, Lohman, Pryer, Medina) have cited Minor as precedent for NBC.
(@Gordon, @Lohman, @Pryer (sp), @Medina) Funny that, that you would specifically include only Democrats/liberals.
The rest are attempts to allow naturalized citizens to be eligible to the Presidency, they are currently excluded.
Yeah, I guess being more subtle was a necessity after being busted the first time trying to do it.
Those don’t try to change the definition of “natural born citizen”.
While technically true, it nevertheless tries to undermine the intent of the Founding Fathers which was avoiding foreign influence in the office of POTUS.
Good effort. Yours is the first answer that even attempts to answer the question.