Maquis on May 2, 2008 at 5:19 PM

Thanks, that clears it up a bit. It is not surprising that laws have changed since the 60′s. I also understand that Germany has had immigration from (Muslim) Turkey and does not want them to give them unlimited citizenship.

A bit confusing, but anyone confused about McCain’s status as a US citizen is either terminally stupid or cravenly disingenuous

I agree 100%

Ed, I am not sure that:

No one has ever suggested before now that a person born of American citizens at an American military base has any other status than natural-born American citizenship. Otherwise, all children born abroad in military families would have to be naturalized when they came back to the United States.

Is an accurate statement. My wife was born on a US base in what was West Germany. When she was 18 she had to go before a judge and pledge her loyalty to the United States. I am not sure if this means that she is a nautalized citizen or not, but on her passport, under “place of birth,” it says West Germany.

dentalque on May 2, 2008 at 9:56 AM

Dental,
Way back when, kids born to US parents in Germany gained “dual-citizenship,” but it wasn’t permanent, at age 18 they had to declare one or the other. Her oath to the judge wasn’t a naturalization, it was more of a rejection of her rights to the German citizenship and affirmation of her American one. That’s changed now, my own daughter born not long ago in Germany on a US base to a non-US non-German mother cannot in any fashion be claimed by Germany, and couldn’t be even if born off-base, she is an American. She has claim to Congolese citizenship if she were to seek it, but she won’t ever be required to make a choice in order to keep her American citizenship, as Congo hasn’t already “granted” citizenship as Germany used to.

A bit confusing, but anyone confused about McCain’s status as a US citizen is either terminally stupid or cravenly disingenuous.

Let it be an October surprise.

Has Obama ever produced a birth certificate?

How do we know he is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States?

Red Pill on May 2, 2008 at 10:30 AM

This is a very good question. The media is not asking it. I would like to see the outcome of the passport investigation by the state department.

A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often….

That’s part of the reason so much of this issue is so convoluted. The question begins with what natural born means. If the founders took it to mean what the bench mark at the time, i.e., English Law, then, of course, McCain is natural born. That this is the view seems backed up by Congress’ elaboration on it in 1790 Act.

But that is a statute as is all legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President. Yet, that is also what SS1401 of Title 8, is and that defines those born in PR as: citzens at birth. Now even if you might in some way reason that those who were alive at the time of the passage of this law as not natural born citizens, because they were granted it by the legislation, what about the children of those born of these citizens or the children of these children? Your explanation would seem to put them still outside the realm of “natural born” for the purposes of running for President. On it’s face, that doesn’t seem any more right than denying McCain natural born status, imho.

This apparent contradiction such as it seems, brings us bak to legal differences in terms and what differences accrue when speaking of Constitutional text and Statutory text. It’s why the issue is uncertain.as opposed to certain. It’s why the McCaskill’s resolution, which is “non-binding”, was moronic and a waste of political posturing time.

As for the Presidential elections, since we as PR residents cannot vote, one has to wonder why campaign there for delegates to the conventions, since our sole Delegate in Congress does not have a vote on the floor.

newton on May 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM

Because a Shark can become a Jet? (I am dating myself)

If Barak Obama grew up in Puerto Rico instead of Hawaii he would still be eligible to run for President because the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is sovereign US Territory.

jerryofva on May 2, 2008 at 11:21 AM

That’s true… up to a point.

Under the Jones Act of 1917, every person born in PR is considered a US citizen; however, if born in the territory, one cannot run for the Presidency and, if a resident of PR, one cannot vote in the Presidential elections. That’s why you don’t see any native Puerto Rican trying to run for President nowadays. Of course, for those born here in the Mainland, the story is different.

As for the Presidential elections, since we as PR residents cannot vote, one has to wonder why campaign there for delegates to the conventions, since our sole Delegate in Congress does not have a vote on the floor.

Ok, that makes sense then. The parents of the woman I dated fits that description. Her father was born in the US and was stationed in the Air Force, and her mother was Columbian, but was probably naturalized as a Panamanian.

That applies to children of Panamanian ancestry not to US citizens born in the Canal Zone. When McCain was born the Zone had the same status as the Philippines, Guam, Hawai, Alaska, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

If Barak Obama grew up in Puerto Rico instead of Hawaii he would still be eligible to run for President because the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is sovereign US Territory.

I’ve visited the Zone twice in my lifetime, once when it was US and just two months ago. The US still has the right to defend the canal with our Military.

For a foreign born child to have a right to be considered a natural born citizen only requires one parent to be a US citizen, and it doesn’t matter whether the birth occurs on a US base or even if you’re affiliated with the US government/military in any way. Having lived/travelled overseas for much of my life, I know this as a fact, which is why I nearly bust a gut laughing when this whole thing started.

Yeah, but would it be ambiguous if a Democrat had been born outside the U.S.? In fact, the Constitution is not even remotely ambiguous on this; Article I, sec. 8 gives Congress the right to establish a “uniform Rule of Naturalization.” Thus, to the extent that the meaning of “natural born” is not, on its face, clear enough to include the child of two U.S. citizens born on a U.S. military base on territory controlled by the U.S., the fact that Congress’ “uniform Rule of Naturalization” accords citizenship to someone in McCain’s position (see 8 U.S.C. sec. 1401) makes this so abundantly clear that anyone who doubts it is: 1) an ignoramus; 2)a moron; 3) a law professor; 4) a die-hard and completely unprincipled Democrat desparate to ensure, at any cost, that McCain can’t become president; or 5) (most likely) a combination of some or all of the above.

(3) John McCain was born in the US Panama Canal Zone, which was sovereign US territory in its entirety until we turned it over to Panama under the Carter-eraCarter Error treaty.

Fixed.

(1) All individuals born in the United States or its sovereign territory are natural born US citizens.
(2) We have status of forces agreements with many nations that declare US Bases as sovereign US territory. When we were the occupying power in Germany and Japan after the war and I believe all US bases were so declared
(3) John McCain was born in the US Panama Canal Zone, which was sovereign US territory in its entirety until we turned it over to Panama under the Carter-era treaty.

In 1964, some people suggested that Barry Goldwater was ineligible for the Presidency because he was born in Arizona territory in 1908. The argument was dismissed as nonsense by commentators from both political parties. Perhaps this was the case because Goldwater was going lose big time anyway and the Democrats had yet to transform themselves into a totalitarian party. The Democratic Party of today is more likely to press this issue if it helps elect a socialist president in 2008.

How do we know he is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States?