Nikki Haley (Nimarata Nikki Haley (née Randhawa)) was born Jan. 20, 1972
Her father became a naturalized citizen on Oct. 18, 1977—five years after Nikki was born.
Therefore, Nikki’s father Ajit Singh Randhawa was NOT a natural born U.S. Citizen. He was born in Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Ajit Signh Randhawa. (Oct. 18, 1977). Petition for Naturalization, Cat. No. 2216867, Nikki Haley father. D.S.C., Columbia Division. Source:
https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/2805:2504
Click to access 1977-10-18-Ajit-Signh-Randhawa-Petition-for-Naturalization-Cat-No-2216867-Nikki-Haley-father-DSC-Columbia-Division-Oct-18-1977.pdf
this may true... but they still let oblamo be president..... that requirement is apparently just a recommendation.....
There is a case for him and being a natural born citizenship based on the mother. Harvard law review actually has a great article on this subject. Nikki and Kamala do not.
The crux of the 14th is who has jurisdiction. Most every other nation defers to the father’s nationality. We did until 1790 when we made a carve out for the mother being a citizen if the father had resided in the US for a time. They eventually made the statuses the same for both the father and mother meaning only one needed to be a citizen for their child to be a citizen at birth.
Problem with Nikki and Kamala are that neither of their parents were citizens at their birth so whose jurisdiction should they fall under. Obtuse assholes use this to mean magic dirt since they are in the US jurisdiction meaning the child belongs to the state not the parents.
Not a law fag.
Doesn’t answer everything but provides context on what citizenship has meant via our law at several points in time. https://harvardlawreview.org/forum/vol-128/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/
Clarification on Natural Born Citizen:
https://greatawakening.win/p/17s5kMc4Qi/natural-born-citizen-explained--/c/
Thanks. Just providing more context. Never said I agreed with harvard but they do provide history of our laws and how they came to be. They never really address magic dirt but they focus intently on the status of the parent which I think is an admission that it is the parent that determines citizenship not the dirt.
The status of the male parent, the father. This issue has either been obfuscated or overlooked by the "experts".