Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Questions about the 14th Amendment, and the effects of Nimrota being eligible and anchor babies.
12/31/2023 | Dacula

Posted on 12/31/2023 12:53:14 PM PST by Dacula

I had a discussion today with a church buddy, he was professing the fact that Nimrata was going to be the GOP choice for president. Back-and-forth banter took place.

My thought is that her parents were NOT citizens at the time she was born, therefore she is not eligible. Similar to Obama.

He also stated that anchor babies who are born in the United States are automatically US citizens. I disagree.

Please help.


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: anchor; babies; birdbrain; cantspellhername; president; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

1 posted on 12/31/2023 12:53:14 PM PST by Dacula
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dacula

Recent threads on the issue of Natural Born citizenship of had hundreds of replies here on Free Republic.

There is no Free Republic consensus on this subject. I don’t know if the 14th amendment has anything to do with presidential eligibility.


2 posted on 12/31/2023 12:58:52 PM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula
14th Amendment Birthright Citizenship: A Fraud on the Constitution
3 posted on 12/31/2023 12:59:55 PM PST by Carry_Okie (The tree of liberty needs a rope.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula

It doesn’t matter. No one is going to vote for Hatchet Face anyway.


4 posted on 12/31/2023 1:00:45 PM PST by Venkman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: Dacula

Has the Natural Born Citizen or the Anchor Baby issue ever been decided in the Supreme Court?


6 posted on 12/31/2023 1:06:46 PM PST by Bernard (We honor veterans who fought to keep this country from turning into what it now is. --Argus Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula

What about anchor babies?


7 posted on 12/31/2023 1:07:23 PM PST by Dacula
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula
Federal Courts have supported the automatic citizenship of Anchor Babies (except for foreign diplomat babies) since the 1890s.

To my knowledge, the Anchor Baby - automatic citizenship issue has never been challenged in the Supreme Court.

Also, to my knowledge, the Anchor Baby - Natural Born Citizen (eligible for President) issue has never been challenged in the Supreme Court.

8 posted on 12/31/2023 1:09:38 PM PST by zeestephen (Trump "Lost" By 43,000 Votes - Spread Across Three States - GA, WI, AZ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Bump.


9 posted on 12/31/2023 1:11:38 PM PST by Yogafist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dacula

Obama getting elected twice effectively nullified the NBC requirement.


10 posted on 12/31/2023 1:15:46 PM PST by SecondAmendment (The history of the present Federal Government is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula

Please help.

Can’t, until the federal court system rules on the subject its simply a matter of opinion. The court have never addressed the issue.

Since the court refused to take the case of Obama, it is now the accepted legal standard that citizenship granted at birth whether by blood or place meets the standard.


11 posted on 12/31/2023 1:18:58 PM PST by usurper (AI was born with a birth defect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula

Obama is a peculiar case. It is not certain that his father was even Barack Hussein Obama Senior, native of Kenya (18 June 1934 – 24 November 1982). His genetic father was more likely Frank Marshall Davis (December 31, 1905 – July 26, 1987), an American journalist, poet, political and labor movement activist.

I want to see a DNA test. It may turn out, that neither man was Barack Hussein Obama’s genetic father, and that would muddy things up a lot.


12 posted on 12/31/2023 1:21:41 PM PST by alloysteel (Most people slog through life without ever knowing the wonders of true insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula

You must think the constitution means anything anymore....


13 posted on 12/31/2023 1:23:36 PM PST by Organic Panic (Democrats. Memories as short as Joe Biden's eye)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard

In Minor v. Happersett (1875), the Supreme Court defined two classes of persons. The first class consists of children born in the United States, of U.S.-citizen parents. The second class consists of all other U.S.-born children, regardless of their parents’ citizenship. The Court used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to members of the first class. Regarding members of the second class, the Court doubted they were even citizens, let alone natural born citizens. In the Court’s opinion, natural born citizens are “distinguished from” aliens or foreigners, suggesting that a natural born citizen is someone who is not a “foreigner” (foreign citizen) at birth [05].
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the Supreme Court, reversing prior precedent, ruled that, under some circumstances, children born in the United States, of non-U.S.-citizen parents, acquire U.S. citizenship at birth. But, to this day, the Supreme Court has never ruled that such children are natural born citizens. On the contrary, our nation’s highest court has consistently used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to persons born on U.S. soil, to U.S.-citizen parents.


14 posted on 12/31/2023 1:24:46 PM PST by South Dakota (Patriotism is the new terrorism .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dacula
The key term in the 14th Amendment is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Nimrata Randhawa was born to two Indian parents and she, as they, were subject to the laws of India at the time of her birth.

If her parents decided to leave the United States, the United States had no jurisdiction to stop them from taking her with them, again, because they were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States until they became citizens years later.

15 posted on 12/31/2023 1:26:21 PM PST by T.B. Yoits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula
He also stated that anchor babies who are born in the United States are automatically US citizens. I disagree.

Your friend is correct. You don't have to like it. I don't like it. But that's the law.

16 posted on 12/31/2023 1:27:06 PM PST by Drew68 (Ron DeSantis for President. A conservative who fights and wins..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usurper

You are close to correct. Also, every US Supreme Ct Justice was taught in law school that anchor babies qualify (Alexander Hamilton types do not.) Every Justice, every law student. FR loves this issue. It is not an issue. See - Obama.


17 posted on 12/31/2023 1:29:10 PM PST by Oystir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

Even if she got the nomination it would be a total blow out. She might win a handful of states.


18 posted on 12/31/2023 1:30:24 PM PST by escapefromboston (Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula
My thought is that her parents were NOT citizens at the time she was born, therefore she is not eligible. Similar to Obama.

That's the view of NBC conspiracy theorists who cannot point to "their" definition of NBC. She was born in the US, therefore like Vivek she is eligible. That she is a horrible choice for president is a separate matter.

Questions about Obama's eligibility on the other hand were due to lack of a birth certificate, not parents' citizenship status.

19 posted on 12/31/2023 1:36:31 PM PST by libh8er
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dacula

Babies born in USA (50 states) are citizens.
18USC ch12 (III)(1) 1401
If you are born in the USA there is no stipulation that your parents have to US citizens. It just is by law.


20 posted on 12/31/2023 1:38:17 PM PST by Liaison (TANSTAAFL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson