Let Kamala be chosen the Democrat candidate in their August convention.
Immediately afterwards, Trump can challenge Kamala's candidacy to the Supreme Court. She is ineligible by law and doesn't meet the Constitution requirements to be president. She was never born as a natural citizen of the U.S., which is a legal requirement. There is no way around it.
The Democrats will waste time making Kamala the candidate... and then in September they will have to name a different ELIGIBLE candidate instead. That new candidate will be too late to get on the ballot in many states, and too late for mail-out ballots in some states.
Actually 14th is not clear.
I believe White Hats may use this issue to overturn the US v. Wong (anchor baby) decision which wrongly interpreted 14th. For instance American Indians were not recognized as citizens until a law in 1920s well after the Wong decision even though they obviously were born in US.
SCOTUS also never made decision with respect to Article 2 meaning of ‘natural born’, only the 14th. Could conceivably wind up with 2 definitions of natural born one for birthright citizenship for anchor babies and other for presidential eligibility.
But preferably they would overturn Wong and make natural born mean Jus Sanguinis
Let Kamala be chosen the Democrat candidate in their August convention.
Immediately afterwards, Trump can challenge Kamala's candidacy to the Supreme Court. She is ineligible by law and doesn't meet the Constitution requirements to be president. She was never born as a natural citizen of the U.S., which is a legal requirement. There is no way around it.
The Democrats will waste time making Kamala the candidate... and then in September they will have to name a different ELIGIBLE candidate instead. That new candidate will be too late to get on the ballot in many states, and too late for mail-out ballots in some states.
The Constitution says she is eligible. She was born in the US even though her parents were not citizens. The 14th is pretty clear.
Actually 14th is not clear. I believe White Hats may use this issue to overturn the US v. Wong (anchor baby) decision which wrongly interpreted 14th. For instance American Indians were not recognized as citizens until a law in 1920s well after the Wong decision even though they obviously were born in US. SCOTUS also never made decision with respect to Article 2 meaning of ‘natural born’, only the 14th. Could conceivably wind up with 2 definitions of natural born one for birthright citizenship for anchor babies and other for presidential eligibility. But preferably they would overturn Wong and make natural born mean Jus Sanguinis
There was an exception made specifically regarding the citizenship of Indians