The Situation Room: Is McCain Eligible To Be President?
By Nicole Belle Thursday Feb 28, 2008 1:45pm
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Bill)
What if you ran a candidate who was disqualified from being President by virtue of the location of his birth? It has to make some in Republican circles a little nervous to think about.
Here’s something you may not know about John McCain: He was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. His father was stationed there in the Navy.
The New York Times reports the circumstances surrounding McCain’s birth raise questions about his ability to become president since our founding fathers specifically said only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the highest office in the land. The idea was to prevent foreigners from becoming president.
There’s no precedent for McCain. No U.S. president has ever been born outside the 50 states. But, McCain’s campaign says they’re confident he meets the requirement, that they researched the question during his last run in 2000 and this time around as well. And they have asked former solicitor general Theodore Olson to prepare a legal opinion.
So is John McCain eligible to be President if he was not born in the US? To be honest, I thought it was a ridiculous question, since my lay understanding of international law is that military bases and embassies in foreign countries were considered to be American soil, but after consulting my brother in law the attorney, there does appear to be a little technical problem:
"Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth."
However, the Panama Canal zone was under U.S. sovereignty at the time of McCain's birth. The question stands on whether that constitutes being part of the United States.
It's a question for legal minds now, but how funny would it be if after all this, John McCain would be forced to bow out of the race on grounds of ineligibility?
Login or Register to post comments.
Haha. Yeah, it would be funny, wouldn't it?
Speaking as a lawyer myself though, I'd say there's a 95% chance that McCain can proceed with his campaign without any worry at all.
If you are born to US citizens, it doesn't matter where you were born. You are also a US citizen.
Well if Ted Olson says its alright then we all have to believe him.
No doubt he is eligible ... But is he capable? That is the question. The man goes off on mad tirades every once in a while. (much like boosh) Plus he just can't seem to understand that America (the people of) don't want this war since we know we were lied into it.
I thought "natural born" just means that you can't have been born by C-section. But maybe I'm wrong about that.
I can't imagine this is an issue at all. But watch McCain play it like he's a victim of some vast conspiracy.
I hate Republicans as much as the next guy, but this argument doesn't even pass the smell test.
It's way overblown and quite ridiculous. They meant someone who was born a citizen and didn't become one later. That is natural born.
It's spelled out somewhere when McCain did the research in 2000. I just can't find it right now.
But, I think this is such a waste of everyone's time.
Ridiculous to be arguing this.
Bangkok Bob @ 4:
And since I brought up bush, You couldn't ask for a better model of a complete moronic idiot.
His bad grammar, his malapropism's combined with his facial ticks are something that will be studied for years to come by the psychiatric community.
McCain was a lot more fun when him and Stewart were boxing each other on the Daily Show.
Save Our Troops @ 2:
Except the Constitution specifically says natural born, not just a citizen, and doesn't define the term natural born. So a strict constructionist, like McCain, will appoint only judges who look at the 1789 understanding of the term in making a ruling, yes? IANAL, thank God, but it would be interesting to see what the phrase "natural born citizen" meant back then.
The question isn't whether his parents were citizens. Read the Constitution:
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
Being a Citizen is certainly required as well as being a "natural born" type of citizen.
He's can be President. He was born of American parents, that makes him qualified no matter where he was born.
I consider a “natural-born citizen” anyone who was a citizen of the US upon birth. Including John McCain.
Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill an Obama supporter has introduced a bill to make sure children of military people are considered natural born citizens. Obama is the co-sponsor.
Would be silly to penalize children of military folk for their parents sacrifice. This should be a non-issue.
Nice of McCaskill and Obama to introduce this legislation don't you think?
Yeah he is eligible, but it does bring back the question about GW and Cheney being from the same state, and if that hurt their eligibility to run. Didn't hurt them, won't hurt him, after all, maybe his mother went into labor stateside but he didn't actually emerge under she was in Panama, so technically he was birthed in the US, just emerged in Panama. Like Cheney has a mailbox in Montana, so technically he and GW weren't residents of the same state, they just resided in the same state at the same time. Technically....
Save Our Troops @ 2:
I am glad that you read the post before commenting.
Yikes.
It’s a question for legal minds now, but how funny would it be if after all this, John McCain would be forced to bow out of the race on grounds of ineligibility?
no republicans should be allowed in the usa.
Eric Jaffa @ 13:
Natural born, huh, does birth by c-section count? What if the mom had anesthesia? Maybe the only technically eligible is Tom and Katie's baby. That was a natural birth wasn't it?
Is this some round about way for CNN to pile on and try to discredit The New York Times? The issue is a non starter and a waste of time.
If we can have a president who was born from a donkey's ass, I'm sure McCain will be fine.
Is this the "miracle' Huckabee was talking about?
For those arguing what you consider a 'natural born citizen' or whether kids of foreign serving military are citizens. Those aren't the issues.
The issue isn't whether he is a citizen or not. He is a citizen. Period.
The issue is whether as per the relevant wording of the constitution means born on U.S. soil. Which McCain was not.
I'm sure this won't be an issue though. It seems far to nitpicky, and as I've pointed out already, there is a bill to make sure children of American military born outside of the U.S. are considered natural born citizens.
Save Our Troops - that's not true. Citizenship is not determined by bloodlines, it is by place of birth. One must be born in the US to be a naturalized citizen.
I thought McCain was covered because his parents were stationed in the Panama Canal Zone, and it seemed like he should be okay because his father was serving our country. But I guess that's not true, in fact it's more of a sentimental reason than a fail-safe reason. I really would like to see this one argued, and to see the rules properly defined.
What an ironic twist of fate - that the jingoistic GOP'ers are prepared to vote for someone who kind of is not a real citizen. I would laugh and laugh and laugh...
Does that mean McCain MIGHT be eligible to run for President of Panama?
I'm quite sure that McCain will be eligible. However, wouldn't Huckabee-as-default give everybody a kick in the head?
jp @ 21:
be healed! maybe so... ;O)
The dude is badly damaged goods. Hell, who wouldn't be after having survived 5-1/2 years of torture. Why is this man being encouraged to run for the presidency? Anyone in their 70s is at a higher risk for health issues as well as lose of mental acuity. I'm in my late 60s and am in great health but I turned down the request that I run for the presidency for those very reasons. With McCain's history he's lucky to be doing as well as he is. Thinking about putting him in the pressure cooker that is the presidency of this country at this time is just plain irresponsible and stupid. I'd feel that way even if I agreed with him.
Funny? Yes.
Probability of it happening? Seriously doubt it.
Filthy Harry @ 22:
Incorrect. If this is the case, Schwarteneggar be President of the US? He is a citizen, afterall.
I hope this becomes a major issue after he's been nominated.
I've been wondering if this is the miracle that Hyuckaberry has been waiting for. Or even Willard "the Mittster" Romney (he never actually officially dropped out, did he?).
Who cares about citizenship.
McCain is disqualified for having never attained the age requirement of thirty-five years.
He stopped maturing at the age of ten.
This is a non-issue. It's the type of fetish that only gives lawyers a hard-on.
king of mean @ 24:
He was born in the Zone which was not part of Panama - or was it?
There are volumes of reasons that McCain isn't qualified to be POTUS - this is not one of them. He was born of US citizens on a US military base. When I heard this a few days ago, I figured the "dreamer upper" had been sniffing glue.
As much as I don't like McCain, this is a non-issue. He was born on a US base, which is our territory and it would be a disservice to our nation to say people born on military bases aren't natural born citizens. Lets not make a nonissue out of this stuff, there is plenty of shit to complain about with grandpa John besides these technicalities.
The knuckle draggers have been trying to push the idea that Obama is a Manchurian candidate and a Muslim agent. Maybe McCain is the real Manchurian candidate and an agent of Manual Noriega!
ashton @ 29:
The issue isn't whether citizens can be president. The issue is whether a child born to American military parents serving outside the U.S. is considered to be a natural (born on U.S. soil) born citizen. How would that apply to Arnold?
This is a non-issue. McCain's parents were US citizens, so he is. It doesn't have to do with where he happened to be born. At birth, he was "naturalized" by virtue of his birth parents being US citizens. Let's move on to something important...
Nuances in the law are out the window, folks. Born outside the borders of the US? No problem. Torture war prisoners? No problem. Refuse to appear before Congress despite the subpoena with your name on it? How cares? When the highest law enforcement official in the US and his republican president can do anything they want to keep their actions hidden from the constitutional authority of the House to conduct oversight of the Executive branch, this is what you get. Lawlessness on a scale never before seen. Hyperbole? Nope, just my opinion.
As much as I would appreciate the irony of strict constructionism coming back to bite the conservatives, practically speaking, this is a non-starter. We have more productive avenues to oppose the neo-cons.
Yeah. This issue is silly. I don't care if he was born here or not. I'm still not voting for him.
I cannot imagine anyone of McCain's age wanting to take the most god awful, energy consuming, rigorous job in the world. Why not retire, relax and enjoy the rest of his life with his family?
I know Obama is a lightweight and libs are afraid he will get eaten for lunch by McCain but this is obscured, will you people stop at nothing
If people would read the previous comments it would save a lot of REDUNDANCY!
My understanding is that if a child is born on a US military base then it is a native US citizen because it's considered US territory.
Libertina @ 38:
His citizenship is not the issue. Yes he is a citizen. No one disputes that. The dispute is whether the Constitution requires presidents to be born on U.S. Soil. McCain was born in Panama, which was a U.S. Sovereignty at the time so the waters are kind of muddy. Only reason its an issue is because it never came up before. Now that it has, a bill has already been introduced (co-sponsored by Obama) to make sure that children of military parents born overseas are considered to be born on U.S. Soil natural citizens.
BobD @ 15:
NOT Montana. We NEVER claimed Cheney, nor would we want to. That dubious distinction goes to the unfortunate people of Wyoming, who, through no fault of their own, have to claim him.
Looks like McCain was born at Coco Solo a United States Navy submarine base.
My understanding is that military bases and Embassies are considered to be part of what ever country owns them.
Since it is a constitutional question, we'd really need the Supreme Court to rule on the issue. I doubt very much the issue would ever get there. McCain's temperament and ideology ought to be more than enough to disqualify him from the presidency. Hopefully, my fellow citizens will vote wisely.
W.H. Sauter @ 45:
As per the article: “Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.”
I was surprised too.
I think this is a non issue but you remember when the repugs wanted to make it legal to run Ahnold for president. I love it when they think movie stars are real heroes.
U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV:
Are those born in U.S. territories born in the United States or naturalized through statutes granting automatic citizenship to such infants? Its a valid question. The Panama Canal Zone, while a U.S. territory, is certainly not a State.
That being said, can anyone really imagine the Supreme Court taking the Presidency away from a candidate elected by the people?
ScrewBush @ 11:
I disagree. It says "or", as in one "or" the other. MCCain is covered, of course.
The key phrase in "natural born."
That's not to forbid the cesarian section born like me.
Black's Law Dictionary, a reputable tertiary source defines natural born as one born to citizens of the United States temporarily residing in another country.
JC @ 7:
Pretty simple. You are an American citizen if you are born "Jus soli" or "Jus sanguini." I don't like the mothefucker, but unfortunately he is good to go.
"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President;"
McCain is eligible by virtue of the latter requirement, since he was a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. It was close, but he made it.
ScrewBush @ 3:
Olson "took one for the team" on 9/11.
fiver @ 52:
Um... Let's ask Al Gore.
Here's the relevant quote from the link:
So, in a sense, he would not be a natural-born U.S. Citizen, but be granted citizenship based on his parents' rights to claim citizenship for him (they're both U.S. Citizens).
Could this be the miracle Huckabee has been waiting for?
Filthy Harry @ 22:
Nah, he's fine. You're either natural-born or naturalized. Since natural born isn't defined, it can help by understanding it is different from naturalized. Did McCain have to apply for citizenship, take a test etc? No. Why, because he's natural-born, not naturalized.
Bottom Line:
Either way it swings he has the same chance of winning the Presidency as I do.
Doesn't this mean that Romney wouldn't be eligible to be the president? Wasn't he born in Mexico? I'm pretty sure he wasn't born on a US Military base either.
Panamacainian?
Filthy Harry @ 14:
Very smooth politics. McCain is calling Obama a closet muslim, and Obama is passing a law ensuring McCain can run against him. Have I said how much I like this Obama guy?
chris @ 43:
Please, see above. I believe Obama is elegantly phrasing a "bring it on" to you conservative intellectual lightweights.
Page 5, section d (at the bottom), says very clearly that before 1941 there was no legal definition, and therefore must be judged on a case by case basis. I think McCain's safe.
Well question the validity of McC's campaign and the trolls come out of the woodwork! Why aren't they haunting the Hagee thread, guess they must not have been told to by GlennBeckAnnCoultureMicheleMalkinLimbaugh yet. Don't really know if they are trolls or sheep but I do smell lanolin in the air! Save me Maamaa!
fiver @ 52:
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Not this court anyway, right?
It wouldn't matter anyway, it would go to the Supreme court and the bought-and-paid for mercenary Supreme justices owned by Bushco would rule that McCain is fine.
I wonder was the Republican's going to use the eligiblity of Obama (if Obama wins the nomination)by saying his father was not American but now that line of attack has been derailed because the Republican's are having to defend McCain's birth eligibly they cann't trun around and make a big deal of Obama birth.
Okay, McCain has had enough time today. Might I put in a request for a post of Hillary Clinton's new ad so that we can discuss it. That's going to be such an interesting comment thread.
Filthy Harry @ 14:
Agreed.
I may not want McCain to be President, I may even loathe the man; but while it might be amusing; it'd also be immensely stupid if he was disqualified over something like this. That's Republican douchebaggery, we're better than that shit.
Ryan @ 65:
I like it!
Razzamatazz @ 33:
No comment on this from Ysbaddaden?
pissed off patricia @ 72:
Make sure you wear protection before going to that comment section. Is Marge around?
Barry Goldwater wasn't born in the US and he ran for President...
Why is there a new bill to regularize the status of military dependents born overseas? I thought that had been resolved in 1967. Posssibly the Act I'm recalling made them citizens, but failed to stipulate "natural-born". My sister occasionally gets grief about this from particularly stupid bureaucrats. She was born before the Act, but it decreed that she was a citizen from birth.
This would make a good excuse if he needs one to bail, but it wouldn't be a real issue for a Republican. It might be amusing to ask McCain if he would pardon his homeboy Noreiga.
Old Billy @ 75:
Funny, after I made that comment, I thought oh my god I've set myself up for a tongue lashing from Marge. She'll say I need to take Viagra for sure.
more to the questtion than meets the untrained eye.
the following link devotes 3,000 words to this question. its worth reading whether your believe he should be eligible or not.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/why-john-mccain-ineligible-be-president-u...
eLad in Mo @ 53:
I think this whole issue is slightly silly, however your example is incomplete.
It says "or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution"
So, either you believe that McSenile is a lot older than he is, OR you didn't finish reading the part of the Constitution, the part that followed the "or".
Good thing Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state.
U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8:
I believe the automatic citizenship granted to children born to Americans on military bases arises from federal statute. If that is the case, the argument that McCain is a "naturalized" citizen rather than one "born ... in the United States" gets stronger. There may actually be something to this. Unfortunately, Bush has so politicized the Federal Courts that this issue is unlikely to receive a fair hearing.
JC @ 7:
I agree 100%...this is an absolute non-story.
This is a non-issue, at least from the Democratic party perspective.
Now it is interesting in the post-McCain victory scenario.... Are there five votes on the Supreme Court to nullify?
If his VP is conservative and more acceptable to the vast right wing conspiracy, then a post-victory challenge from the RIGHT before the Supreme Court could lead the right wing judges to declare him ineligible, placing his VP in office.
The strategy to forestall that outcome would be to select a moderate rather than conservative VP, more of a clone of himself than a sop to the right, to ensure that there would be no advantage to the right in challenging his eligibility post election.
On the other hand, if he refused to step down, the presumably Democratic Congress could refuse to impeach him, leaving him in office. But if he also "successfully" brought in Republican control of Congress, then he might be in danger of being impeached for failure to follow the determination of the Supreme Court that he was not eligible to serve.
All in all, fascinating, but I wouldn't give it a moments thought.
Filthy Harry @ 14:
From what I remember of high school civics, I recall that foreign US military bases were considered US soil, not unlike US embassies.
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
This clearly states that the person has to have been either a natural born citizen OR a citizen of the US at the time of the adoption of the constitution.
One of the two at the time of the adoption.
So clearly, NOBODY born after 1787 is eligible to be president. Only people 220 years old or older are eligible.
Which settles it. McCain is eligible.
John "The Panamanian Candidate" McCain
******agent of Manuel A. Noriega!******
(this comment is completely meant in jest, for any of the simpleton rightwingnutjob-crybabies who might get all twitterpated by reading it)
this is relevant FAM portionspecifically for Panama, in conjunction with the one listed above.
the act of August 4, 1937 was the first statute to provide citizenship for certain individuals born in the Canal Zone. The US citizen parent did not need prior US residence to transmit citizenship, and no retention requirements applied. if hew was not a citizen at birth, he became on August 4, 1937. because he was born to two citizen parents, and his father was serving in the armed forces, the automatically aquired citizenship at birth through INAsection 1993, as ammended in 1934, meaning because his father resided in the US, the transmission requirement was met.
this might all throw a wrench in everything, considering his citizenship was transmitted to him via his parents, though it was at birth. so the question is not simply is he a citizen, but does acquisition at birth constitute "natural born"?
lol @ Craig #86
wowo, the *whole* thing above should not have been a link, sorry!
Keep in mind folks that true "conservatives" are supposed to be strict constructionists - following the law as written rather than interpreting it. If Arnold cannot be President under the law as written, then again, according to THE law, neither can McCain.
If I were Obama, I would not pursue this because from the perspective of a liberal, the rule regarding being born on soil is archaic, but there is something to this issue. Perhaps Huck wants to go in on this, maybe Romney?
Those darn strict constructionists at the NY TImes. Why can't they liberally intrepret the US Constitution, like the conservatives will now do?
webslinger @ 91:
My larger point above too... this is an issue that will bother conservatives if anyone... and hey, conservatives don't much like McCain, so he probably needs to watch his right, not the Democrats.
Blood and Soil is the old slogan of conservatives and fascists everywhere.... but they only use against their enemies... and McCain may very well qualify.
And if that's the case, they can make a case against obama. Only one of his parents were citizens of the US and in the law passed in 1952 it says to be president both have to be. Go look up the law.
Old Billy @ 74:
Already did, look up 54 ysbaddaden Says
Okay, we've got to STOP talking about this right now. Don't give McCain ANY excuse to play to play the poor underdog role. The 'liberal' MSM dogging him about his ineligibility to be president is exactly the boost he needs.
What about people born by cesarian section? They're not naturally born so maybe they're disqualified from being president too.
Just a thought . . .
Repubs love to use technicalities and obscure footnotes to foist their reality on us, all innocently spun as "gee... just following the law", so they should not mind if a technicality disbars McCain.
Marge @ 94:
Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961; the citizenship of his parents is irrelevant.
Maybe, just maybe the purpose of this hullabaloo is to get the rule changed so that Arnold can run in 2012. Course he'll have to run against Petraeus (Google Petraeus in 2012). And there is the Kennedy connection with Arnold, but the BillC/GWHBush connection hasn't hurt Hilary. Unless the GOP is holding that one close to the chest should she get the nomination.
Lucky for McCain he doesn't have Hillary Clinton to contend with. Between a potential fight over seating Michigan and Florida, the Nevada caucus challenge, and the noise she's now making in Texas, who doubts she would have attempted to upend McCain over his birth in Panama?
CalGeorge @ 32:
I'm afraid that the 'election' of Bush set an unfortunate legal precident and destroyed any hope for any 'mental age' litmus test.
And my family thought I was nuts when I refused to travel to any border States while I was pregant. You can never be too careful :-0 Seriously, I'm not a Mcain fan so maybe I'm prejudiced (OK, I am) but I was convinced in law school that "natural born" meant born in a State that was a member of the Union. This provision was inserted into the Constitution because they were worried about someone been elected to the presidency who was born in Europe and had the mentality of the British or French and whose loyalties could one day be called into question. If he wins I am going to have so much fun filing "frivolous" lawsuits. I never get any court room experience stuck behind a desk at a factory sized law firm.
IgnoranceIsNotBliss @ 64:
Romney was born in Detroit, quite a bit away from Mexico.
Sigh @ 62:
Finally someone states this correctly.
I have a Phillippine birth certificate, and a state department certificate of birth. Neither document explicitly states that I am a US citizen. I have no such document that does, and my parents never had to request one or "apply" for my citizenship.
These two documents have always been accepted as proof of my citizenship. Why? Because I was a citizen at birth, by virtue of my parents being citizens. I'm "natural born," as opposed to naturalized. There is no third type of citizenship.
From the article:
That's right - if the parents are not US citizens then the simple fact of being born on a US base doesn't automatically make the child a citizen. BUT, if the parents are citizens, then the child is automatically a natural born US citizen for that reason.
Get it? There are two ways to be natural born: US parents, and birth in the US. The reason we're having this discussion is that like so many other legal principles, it isn't spelled out in so many words in the constitution. But I think this is the only reasonable legal interpretation of the wording and intent of the constitution and the relevant laws, and I'm sure that even the strictest constructionist would agree.
Now go vote for Obama.
This is a non-problem. The Constitution specifically states "a natural born citizen of the United States" It very clearly does NOT state that one must be born IN the U.S. Mr. McCain was born a citizen of the U.S. by virtue of the fact that his parents were both citizens at the time of his birth. This whole hoo-haw was brought up when Mitt's daddy was running for president back in the day - he was born in Mexico (I think) while his parents were on some sort of missionary work. The Constitution sets out few basic requirements for President - natural born citizen and over 35 years of age (in McCain's case wayyyy over). That's about it. Of course if a lot of the bigot-base Repubs get their way, they will do away with people automatically being citizens if they are born IN the U. S. Makes you wonder what other things they might do away with?
Adam @ 76:
That's right. He was born in Arizona when Arizona was a territory.
His father's income, incidentally, came from government contracts. That's pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.
based on the date, he is not qualified according to the 14th amendment;
c. Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S.
diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the
14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.
The strict constructionist interpretation of “natural-born citizen” should be "no one born by Caesarian section." The clear intent of the founding fathers was not to have another Julius Caesar subverting the republic.
ScrewBush @ 11:
And when you are born to US citizens, you are a citizen (the natural born type).
It's not complicated.
hmmm. I think this is a case for the courts to decide. Wouldn't any voter have standing to sue to remove any reference to an ineligible candidate from a proposed ballot?
oldtree @ 108:
So if McCain qualifies as a citizen because he was born on American soil then would GitMo, a US base be considered American soil? Ipso facto the "detainees" should recieve the rights afforded US citizens, and Habeas Corpus should apply to them.
I say let John have his run, and give the "detainees" their rights as well. Let the right win the McCain battle and we can win the Habeas corpus battle.
What we do to the least amongst us so shall we have done to us.
Michele Walsh @ 106:
Unfortunately, this logic ignores the language of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment which clearly differentiates between citizens born in the U.S. and those "naturalized" by federal statute:
I'm not saying that HB isn't making a persuasive argument, I'm just saying that it doesn't clearly settle the issue.
Just beg to differ with everyone who says that McCain is automatically a citizen because his parents were citizens. I'm in the same boat as St. John, born in a U.S. Army hospital in Germany to 2 American citizens.. My birth certificate is in German, and I had to get naturalized to avoid being drafted into the German army when I hit 18. According to the Constitution, I am not eligible to be President. McCain isn't either, unless of course the Constitution doesn't count anymore. Either he also had to be naturalized, in which case he is SOL, or he is Panamanian. Not really a minor technicality at all.
ashton @ 29:
Argh! Arnold was not born a citizen. McCain was.
I can't STAND the psychotic war-mongering lying SOB . . . but I think he's eligible (20 years of trying Con Law related cases speaking here).
Save Our Troops @ 110:
You got a point, my wife was born in the states to Canadian parents. So my wife is a natural born citizen of the US and she also qualifies for dual citizenship of the country of her parents.
So are you saying that McCain is a citizen of the US by parental lines and a citizen of Panama by birth?
Castaway @ 114:
You are eligible to be president, I'm afraid. You are a German citizen if German law says that you are if you are born there. You are also a US citizen because you were born to US citizens.
The only way that this would be an issue is if it were Obama that was born outside of the US to American parents
Whatever. He's old. He's craaaaaazy.
Get used to hearing that a lot.
Curious, does anybody else get creeped-out when he says 'my friends' this or 'my friends' that?
I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned already, but the Bush (in)Justice Department has effectively proved that military bases overseas are not the USA. It did so in order to deny prisoners at Guantanamo their basic constitutional rights. The Supreme Court has, so far as I'm aware, upheld that arguement. Therefore, by the same token the Canal Zone is foreign soil.
If they now declare that McCain has all the rights of a US citizen born on US soil, then all the prisoners held on Guantanamo should have their legal rights restored.
broadsword @ 120:
I do. Especially when its followed by "...there will be more wars."
What I want to know is, why hasn't McCain distance himself from Noriega? In addition to being a dictator on our payroll, Noriega was a drug lord. McCain was born in Panama, the same place where this drug lord ruled. How can we be sure that McCain isn't a drug lord, too? Won't someone think of the children?
That's how it works, right? I'm pretty sure that's how Obama became a Muslim according to teh internets.
its pretty far fetched to think that the authors of the constitution wouldnt want children of servicemembers deployed in other countries to be elligible for holding the country's highest office. there are plenty of real reasons people have not to elect mccain, this is just a distraction. I cant say im surprised that this forum picked up this non story though... if crooksandliars werent in my pull down history list, id never visit again. anyone have a real political discussion forum to refer me to?
i meant inelligable - the authors obviously wouldnt disqualify someone in his position. however, mccain is a douchbag
IB222 @ 121:
Excellent point! Talk about the Republicans getting back their bad karma.
Correct. He cannot claim natural-born citizen status on the basis of being born on a military installation. But he doesn't need to, he was a US Citizen at birth (aka natural born) because his parents were US Citizens. The text quoted above would only apply to children of non-US citizens that are born on US Military Bases.
McCain IS a natural born citizen by pretty much any definition of the term.
Save Our Troops
You are eligible to be president, I’m afraid. You are a German citizen if German law says that you are if you are born there. You are also a US citizen because you were born to US citizens.
If one has to be naturalized, one is not natural to start with. I have papers that prove I'm a citizen now, but until the judge swore me in I was most definitely a German citizen, according to the law. If the U.S. government automatically recognized my American citizen, I wouldn't have this certificate of authenticity. Don't worry , I don't want the job.
IB222 @ 121:
Yes! that the point I was trying to make at 112 above. Let the repubs get McCain approved as a citizen, then we can reinstate the rights of the detainees. I don't want our soldiers tortured. Yet by condoning torture we are in no moral standing to denounce torture done to us.
That should not be a party line debate but a humanity debate. People of morals do not torture other people. Period.
wisconsin @ 124:
wisconsin @ 125:
You were correct the first time. When you find "a real political discussion forum," try to avoid the use of double negatives - especially by way of a correction. Use of proper capitalization and punctuation might help too. Just sayin'...
The legal summary cited mentions ius sanguinis, the derivation of citizenship via one's parentage, briefly near the beginning. The rest of it, because it is a State Dept document devoted to explaining the law in reference to ius solis, derivation of citizenship via location of birth, isn't really about McCain's ius sanguinis claim to citizenship. The bit quoted, in particular, clearly refers to the children of foreigners born on US bases abroad, not to the children of US citizens born in such places.
This is a total non-issue. Even talking about it helps the right-wing paint us as anti-military, and is to be discouraged.
I have to agree with IB222.
I was born on an Army base outside Tokyo and have always been told I'm not eligible to be president.
You must be born in this country, period.
A person born in a US Territory is considered a natural citizen, except if born to foreign diplomatic personnel. The Panama Canal Zone was a US Territory. McCain was born at Coco AFB, located in the PCZ, to 2 natural American citizens. Ergo, McCain is eligible to become President.
Natural born is natural born. He wasn't natural born. He was spawned.
If the Bush Junta's crimes constitute legitimate legal precedent (Congress hasn't seen fit to challenge him with impeachment, which only allows his acts to stand as legitimate), then US bases are foreign and not under Constitutional jurisdiction. McCain isn't eligible.
I'm for denying him eligibility, not from the location of his birth, but because he is well into the onset of dementia, and he is a souless, empty-headed panderer. Pop the hood, and there's nothing there.
This is stupid. Did McCain have to go through a Naturalization process to become "Citizenized". No, he did not. Therefore, for 220 years being born of American parents was enough to avoid the Naturalization process.
Thus, for 220 years, people born this way were considered natural born.
Multiple Presidents were born in territories that were not yet states when they were born. This is nearly the same thing.
As others have pointed out, your brother is mistaken -- if even just one of McCain's parents was an American citizen (by virtue of having been born in the US) when they had him, he is an American citizen by birth no matter where he was born. Therefore, I think it's safe to say that he is a "natural born citizen" as required by the Constitution. I know this because I was born in Peru to American citizens. It starts to get tricky when the parents are American, but not born in the US. I know this, because my sister, who also was born in Peru to US-born parents, failed to live in the 'States the requisite amount of time before turning 26 -- resulting in her child, who was born in Australia, NOT being an American citizen. But had my sister been born in the 'States, or had she fulfilled the residence requirement, she could have passed on her citizenship just like our parents did to us and McCain's parents did to him...
"A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth."
Unless born of American parents, surely? This specific analysis does not support the original conjecture that McCain might not qualify per the 14th Amendment.
Both my parents were born in America, I was born in the UK. I was registered with the US embassy there as being of American parents. When I first attempted to travel to the US on my own British passport (just for a few days) I was at the time refused a visa because I was an American citizen. I then got my US passport by simply filling in the oridnary application form. It's that simple.
McCain's ONLY qulaification is that he is a US citizen.
McCain the Liar @ 132:
Whoever told you that was dead wrong. Can anyone seriously believe that children born of U.S. servicemen while they were stationed overseas can't be president. Absolutely preposterous.
Save Our Troops @ 2:
That's the conclusion Factcheck seems to come to in this article. Mitt Romney's dad was born in Mexico, seems no one made mention of it back in 1968.
IB222 @ 121:
Does the BET network have a Sitiation Room?
I am no McCain fan, but I believe a natural born citizen is someone who is either born within the US or born outside the US with both parents being citizens and at least one having once lived in the US prior to the birth. I think the term "natural born" has nothing to do with requiring the birth within the US, but means that the person must not have been a citizen through naturalization.
.
Making room for the Govenator to become the Presidator.
.
There seems to be quite a bit of confusion between citizenship and presidential eligibility. Congress has the power to legislate who may be considered a citizen (at birth or otherwise) in addition to those born in the United States. However, the Congress cannot define (or re-define) what "natural born" means without amending the Constitution. The definition of "natural born" is not a settled question and has never been addressed by the Court.
Mccain is a naturalized US citizen and is not a natural born US citizen and is not eligible to be president. This US State Dept. document regarding citizenship: www.state.gov/documents/organization/86755.pdf says " Historically, a number of U.S. laws have provided for the automatic naturalization of children or wives (not husbands) of naturalized U.S. citizens or for automatic collective naturalization of persons residing in territories over which the United States has gained
sovereignty. " . It also states "Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S.
diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the
14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth. " One such law giving automatic naturalization is title 8 chapter 12 subchapter 13 Section 1403. "Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904" www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1403.html
see also #136
14th Amendment says "natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States" , the former being born on US soil , the latter being born of American parents (with that 26 year/residency modifier to consider) elsewhere.
The "c-section" comment was amusing though :D
BTW thanks to this thread I would like to announce that I am considering the possibility of establishing an exploratory committee to consider a potential presidential candidacy for 2012 on account of my being an American citizen with no ties to any lobbyists or established Party machines and not being a loony.
Natural Born = Citizen at birth
"Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
Anyone born inside the United States
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example."
Barack Obama was born on the island of Hawaii. It looks like the next president of the United States will not have been born in North America--and will be a child of the tropics.
And then there are the Hawaiian native nationalists who insist that Hawaii is a sovereign kingdom and not part of the United States either, because it was illegally annexed. For their argument on why the Honolulu born Barack is not a a natural born citizen See http://www.hawaiiankingdom.info/ I guess Bush will just have to stay on until they can sort this thing out.
Oh, and has anyone else suggested that "natural born" means not by cesarean section?
Brian Rapp @ 57:
I wondered if anyone else would catch this: Actually, no, McCain was NOT a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. He hadn't been born for many years (decades, even) yet.
Thus, according to the wording of the Constitution, no one not born and residing in America at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, can be President. Ergo, all Presidents born after the date of the adoption of the Constitution and who were elected and took office, did so illegally.
Let's "slide by that one" shall we?
Miles Tougeaux @ 147:
The difficulty in applying the U.S. Code in this debate is that Congress is only empowered to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization." U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8.
Login or Register to post comments.