BOMBSHELL: Is Kamala Harris Really Eligible To Become Vice President? The Supreme Court Would Have To Decide
Below is the most important part of this article:
"The language of Article II is that one must be a natural-born citizen. The original Constitution did not define citizenship, but the 14th Amendment does—and it provides that “all persons born…in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” Those who claim that birth alone is sufficient overlook the second phrase. The person must also be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and that meant subject to the complete jurisdiction, not merely a partial jurisdiction such as that which applies to anyone temporarily sojourning in the United States (whether lawfully or unlawfully). Such was the view of those who authored the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause; of the Supreme Court of the United States in the 1872 Slaughter-House Cases and the 1884 case of Elk v. Wilkins; of Thomas Cooley, the leading constitutional treatise writer of the day; and of the State Department, which, in the 1880s, issued directives to U.S. embassies to that effect."
"Were Harris’ parents lawful permanent residents at the time of her birth? If so, then under the actual holding of Wong Kim Ark, she should be deemed a citizen at birth—that is, a natural-born citizen—and hence eligible. Or were they instead, as seems to be the case, merely temporary visitors, perhaps on student visas issued pursuant to Section 101(15)(F) of Title I of the 1952 Immigration Act? If the latter were indeed the case, then derivatively from her parents, Harris was not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States at birth, but instead owed her allegiance to a foreign power or powers—Jamaica, in the case of her father, and India, in the case of her mother—and was therefore not entitled to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment as originally understood."
"The language of Article II is that one must be a natural-born citizen. The original Constitution did not define citizenship, but the 14th Amendment does—and it provides that “all persons born…in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” Those who claim that birth alone is sufficient overlook the second phrase. The person must also be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and that meant subject to the complete jurisdiction, not merely a partial jurisdiction such as that which applies to anyone temporarily sojourning in the United States (whether lawfully or unlawfully). Such was the view of those who authored the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause; of the Supreme Court of the United States in the 1872 Slaughter-House Cases and the 1884 case of Elk v. Wilkins; of Thomas Cooley, the leading constitutional treatise writer of the day; and of the State Department, which, in the 1880s, issued directives to U.S. embassies to that effect."
"Were Harris’ parents lawful permanent residents at the time of her birth? If so, then under the actual holding of Wong Kim Ark, she should be deemed a citizen at birth—that is, a natural-born citizen—and hence eligible. Or were they instead, as seems to be the case, merely temporary visitors, perhaps on student visas issued pursuant to Section 101(15)(F) of Title I of the 1952 Immigration Act? If the latter were indeed the case, then derivatively from her parents, Harris was not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States at birth, but instead owed her allegiance to a foreign power or powers—Jamaica, in the case of her father, and India, in the case of her mother—and was therefore not entitled to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment as originally understood."
https://www.cnyhomepage.com/news/regi...
“Sure,” said Meadows, when asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” whether he acknowledges the fact that she meets the constitutional requirements to be president or vice president. “And I think the president spoke to this yesterday. This is not something that we’re going to pursue.”
More important, if one side makes a legal challenge against a candidate from the other side, the complainer will get a drop in support, win or lose the case.
For your opinion-
This combination Biden/Harris is the dream team - for Trump.
The point, They owed their allegiance to the countries they were citizens of and were not FULLY under the USA's jurisdiction.
Maybe there is an arguable case, but surely would not pass.
Some ramblings-
Now if I were election advisor to Trump I would say,
keep a low profile on this, consider her history and personality, record in public office, and policies.
This is the ideal Democrat team - for you.
On this theme, there is nothing wrong with Pence. But for a VP nominee with enhanced low down appeal that would out-trump Harris, there is Nikki Haley.
If you want someone very low key and right tan level could ask Condo Rice, dignity, class, achievement in public office, the little evidence of values or personality could help, she'd probably decline. She would be a winner, take a knee for Condo.
There are others with the 'right' requirements, an out-of-left-field idea, in this time of national crisis to bring us together both sides etc. etc. ask the one who dumped on Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, an example of the Dem party as it was in the old days of Truman and Carter, certainly left but low corruption and woke hysteria. (?)
{What you have to do to maximize the chance of winning, I hope our ewv is not reading this, very pragmatic].
They let antifa and the like roam wild. No interest in public safety.
The public education system has collapsed.
Very disappointing.
Well, obobo's mom was a citizen but what we still don't know for sure if he was actually born in the US.
That's quite a Different quagmire.
Profile photo, opens profile page on Twitter in a new tab
Kamala Harris
@KamalaHarris
A government has three functions: public health, public safety, and public education. The GOP budget doesn’t prioritize any of them.
1:33 PM · Oct 5, 2017
http://thepatriotnation.net/dem-hero-...
Is THIS where the bait and switch occurs?