Now's the time, frens - Harris is ineligible to run for President because her parents were not US citizens at the time of her birth. Spread it far and wide!
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (201)
sorted by:
Exactly as listed above my reply
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/natural_born_citizen#:~:text=A%20natural%20born%20citizen%20refers,Wong%20Kim%20Ark%2C%20169%20US
Scroll down a few paragraphs
"The Constitution does not expressly define “natural born” nor has the Supreme Court ever ruled precisely upon its meaning."
So who says it is defined as "a citizen whose parents were US citizens at the time of birth"?
And SCOTUS already ruled in United States v. Wong Kim Ark that "anyone born on U.S. soil and subject to its jurisdiction is a natural born citizen, regardless of parental citizenship".
So yes, she is a "natural born citizen" and as such, as much as it pains me to say it, is eligible to be president.
I believe still can be lawsuited because Wong decision was only for citizenship and court did not make any ruling regarding for eligibility for presidential office requirements. I could see white hats may even use her anchor baby status to overturn the Wong decision, which was a terrible precedent.
I’m not sure if a lawsuit would stand because all the constitution says is that the president must be natural born, and that case says that anyone born on US soil is a natural born citizen. It’s pretty open and shut, I don’t see how they could sue regarding eligibility, I think they would need to file a lawsuit based on some other grounds to do that.
"...is a natural born citizen..." No, SCOTUS ruled that they were U.S. citizens. That is not the same as a "natural born citizen."
I might have been confused about your point.
Harris was born in the US and thus is a natural born citizen, a citizen at birth.
Thus she was eligible in 2020 and is eligible now.
You may be right.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/natural_born_citizen
Hey, you discovered a typo.
The only way this sentence makes sense on the page
is if this should say NATURALIZED citizen.
It's using the same term in both sentence 1 and 2 but saying they are different. That makes no sense.
If you look at their definition for naturalization, it makes it clear https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/naturalization
Naturalized citizens have all the same rights and responsibilities as a natural born citizen except for presidential eligibility.
You noticed the exact same thing I did. I was doing a copy and paste of the key paragraphs, then noticed that they contradicted each other.
So instead of claiming source, that seems to have a very basic mistake in it; I just conceded - IMHO, you are 100% correct. But I am not a legal scholar