She was an anchor baby. The question is, can an anchor baby be president?
No. Neither parent was a citizen when she was born. But give the Left an opportunity to crap on the Constitution and they’ll never pass up the chance.
But this constitutional provision only applies to Republicans, somewhere in the fine print, Democrats are exempted. (It must be there because Obama was president).
Already posted and already other threads discussing the exact same thing.
No, but Republicans want to run their own ineligibles so they will not contest Harris any more than they contested Obama.
Jindal, Rubio, Cruz, Haley and George P. Bush are the reasons.
Barack Obama’s presidency broke this mold, and it will never again be brought to bear unless a non-NBC Republican runs for office. Let’s be real though: if Biden wins in November, no Republican will ever again be president. The Democrats will make certain of that.
Yes.
Mark my words, Kamala Harris will face exactly ZERO serious challenges to her eligibility, the debate of which exists nowhere outside a handful of insignificant bloggers and websites pushing the issue. President Trump certainly isn't going to challenge it.
This being said, I'm looking forward to reuniting with all my old birther friends from 2009. Orly Taitz, Leo Donofrio, Lucas "Inspector" Smith...
dont worry, nanzi pelozi will certify her credentials like she did 0bama.
Not only no, but HELL, NO!!
That said, my guess the founders would have said no, they did distinguish natural born citizen from citizen based on concerns of loyalty.
citizen not system. My mind must be playing tricks
No, the Fraud wasn’t either, but most freepers were/are satisfied anyway.
Any “colorful” person on a RAT ticket is Teflon. Obama started that.
No, but Obama wasn’t eligible to be President so sadly it is a moot point.
She’s one step up, on Pee Wee Herman! He MAY have a higher IQ, though... and certainly a better personality! :)
This article postulates a legal opinion that is not the current accepted doctrine. The logic of the current doctrine:
The constitution is the supreme document of the land
It enumerates the power of Congress (Article 1, Section 8, clause 4) the exclusive authority to establish all rules regarding immigration and naturalization. That includes rules for those that require naturalization in order to become a citizen. And those that by the circumstances of birth, are citizens at and from birth i.e. they are natural born, a citizen
Congress expressed it’s rules of naturalization in title 8 section 1401 of the US code
Subsection A specifically incorporates the verbiage of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.
In 1898, subsequent to the passing of the 14th amendment, SCOTUS ruled in the case of US vs Wong Kim Ark, that even though he was born to foreign parents, he was born within the US and by function of his birth circumstances, is/was a citizen at birth.
Similar to that case, Mr Harris is born in the US to non-US citizens. In many ways, her case is nearly identical to to the Wong Kim Ark case.
That is the state if the current legal interpretation. If you disagree with that interpretation, work to elect those in congress who will change the laws.
There are only two categories of citizens - those that have been naturalized (became a citizen) and those that are born a citizen. There is no other category.
In the words of The World’s Smartest Lesbian:
“What difference, at this point, does it make?”