Marco Rubio Is NOT Eligible To Be President or VP

[John F Kennedy III]

We need to spread this truth far and wide between now and 2016. Here in this thread I need your help constructing the best argument possible plus all known evidence.

This seems to be a good start:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Publius/huldah110.htm

https://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/vattel-law-of-nations-is-the-key-and-it-is-now-verified/

There was some other thread here on RPF the other day that inspired this. Does anyone know which thread that was? I didn't even know Rubio isn't a natural born citizen.

[Rudeman]

So if your father is a naturalized citizen and you were born in the US that would make you a natural born citizen, correct? Do both parents need to be citizens? If not would the same apply if it was the mother instead of the father? I'm guessing that was the issue with Obama. I didn't keep up with that stuff.

[RickyJ]

If he is not a natural born citizen and Obama isn't either, yet no one does anything about it then what is to stop the man picked by the elite IMO to be the next president of the USA from becoming president in 2016 just because he was a born in Austria? I know the Constitution prohibits it, but they ignore the Constitution so regularly and might even try to change it by 2016 to allow any US citizen to run for president.

I am talking about Arnold Schwarzenegger.

[Occam's Banana]

Don't really see the point. Democrats won't find using that kind of thing to their advantage, and Republican partisans will only give a damn when they can use it against Democrats.

[truelies]

Don't really see the point. Democrats won't find using that kind of thing to their advantage, and Republican partisans will only give a damn when they can use it against Democrats.

The Repugs were not even willing to seriously raise the Issue regarding BHO. The Reality that McCain R in 2008, Mittens R in 2012 and BHO D 2008 & 2012 are all Constitutionally ineligible to be Prez in exactly the same way is no accident. They were chosen by our Rulers for a pupose.

[RickyJ]

The Repugs were not even willing to seriously raise the Issue regarding BHO. The Reality that McCain R in 2008, Mittens R in 2012 and BHO D 2008 & 2012 are all Constitutionally ineligible to be Prez in exactly the same way is no accident. They were chosen by our Rulers for a pupose.

You are right, they want to do away with the natural born requirement to be president of the USA from the Constitution. They usually get what they want despite what the people want so I assume it will be changed before 2016.

[marc1888]

So what is a natural born citizen?

[Tinnuhana]

Technically, isn't birth on a military base or while stationed on a military base the same as being on USA soil? My oldest nephew supposedly has dual citizenship US/Italian because he was born while my brother was stationed at Vicenza. But I think that's more Italian liberality than US law. It would be a shame if someone was disqualified from the presidency because they were born overseas while their parent was serving the country in the military. Isn't that what happened to McCain?

[John of Des Moines]

To be a "natural born" citizen of the united States a person needs to be born to two U.S. citizens and born in one of the several states. If a person is born a U.S. citizen in any other manner then that person is a "native born" citizen (born anywhere else to one or two U.S. citizens) or if the person is born in the united States to a legal resident individual (whether in one of the states or in a place under u.S. jurisdiction - but not on a u.S. commercial ship in non-u.S. waters. )

[angelatc]

To be a "natural born" citizen of the united States a person needs to be born to two U.S. citizens and born in one of the several states. If a person is born a U.S. citizen in any other manner then that person is a "native born" citizen (born anywhere else to one or two U.S. citizens) or if the person is born in the united States to a legal resident individual (whether in one of the states or in a place under u.S. jurisdiction - but not on a u.S. commercial ship in non-u.S. waters. )

There's no such thing as a native-born citizen according to the Constitution. There's natural born (as in - was a citizen when born) and naturalized (As in, became a citizen by being granted the status by a court.)

And there's also no legal precedent for your definition that I'm aware of, while my definition has hundreds of years of American and English common law. Rubio was born here, he's eligible.

Sorry JFK, but even though I realize this won't change anybody's mind, this isn't Ron Paul's position on the issue, and honestly, makes us look like nutjobs.

[CaptLouAlbano]

There's no such thing as a native-born citizen according to the Constitution. There's natural born (as in - was a citizen when born) and naturalized (As in, became a citizen by being granted the status by a court.)

And there's also no legal precedent for your definition that I'm aware of, while my definition has hundreds of years of American and English common law. Rubio was born here, he's eligible.

Sorry JFK, but even though I realize this won't change anybody's mind, this isn't Ron Paul's position on the issue, and honestly, makes us look like nutjobs.

1000% Correct.

Look I know everyone is chomping at the bit to discredit Rubio, but there is no need to do so. We want Rubio to be a strong contender for the nomination, and we want Rand to be able to defeat him without resorting to "low blows" such as questioning his eligibility. We aren't trying to backdoor Rand into the nomination, we want him to win decisively by demonstrating to the voters that he is by far and away the best man for the job.

[Confederate]

As long as you're born in the US, you're eligible. Where your parents were born is irrelevant.

[fisharmor]

And there's also no legal precedent for your definition that I'm aware of, while my definition has hundreds of years of American and English common law. Rubio was born here, he's eligible.

If we're hanging things on common definitions, then this clause would prevent C-section births from being President, because it wasn't a natural birth.

The reality is that even if it went to SCOTUS (doubtful) they'd simply affirm that he's eligible and that would be the end of it.
It's not like any of those 9 jokers really care what the document says, because it doesn't say "Supreme Court justices get to turn three words into an entire legal doctrine because they're so special".

If they did care what it actually said, then a case like this would get kicked right back to the congress for them to amend the Constitution to say something definitive on the matter.

[hillertexas]

There is an ongoing discussion on this here: http://www.dailypaul.com/262411/stop-rubio-now

[marc1888]

so does that mean that Thomas Jefferson was not a natural born citizen then?


To be a "natural born" citizen of the united States a person needs to be born to two U.S. citizens and born in one of the several states. If a person is born a U.S. citizen in any other manner then that person is a "native born" citizen (born anywhere else to one or two U.S. citizens) or if the person is born in the united States to a legal resident individual (whether in one of the states or in a place under u.S. jurisdiction - but not on a u.S. commercial ship in non-u.S. waters. )

[hillertexas]

//

[randomname]

none of these "rules" matter anymore if you were hand-picked by the PTB.

they're only enforced if it's to their advantage, if Rand were born under the circumstances Rubio was, the media would be crying bloody murder about him being ineligible come 2016

[matt0611]

none of these "rules" matter anymore if you were hand-picked by the PTB.

they're only enforced if it's to their advantage, if Rand were born under the circumstances Rubio was, the media would be crying bloody murder about him being ineligible come 2016

So true.

Guys, this is a waste of time, even if it were true, it won't go anywhere, you're efforts are probably better spent somewhere else.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

We want Rubio to be a strong contender for the nomination


Please start using the word "I" or be more specific about your "we." I am not in your "we." I don't want Rubio to be a strong contender for anything. He doesn't deserve to be a strong contender for anything. He's as fake as your average politician.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Please start using the word "I" or be more specific about your "we." I am not in your "we." I don't want Rubio to be a strong contender for anything. He doesn't deserve to be a strong contender for anything. He's as fake as your average politician.

Fair enough - I want to see it, we should want to see it, because it benefits the goal. The reason being is that at this time, he is considered one of the top tier contenders, if not the leading contender. A candidate wins mass support in the party, and with Independent voters, by demonstrating he is the best person for the job. Rand can do that.

Rubio performing well, but losing, in the primaries can also help Rand when it comes to chipping away at the 70% of Hispanics that vote Democratic. If Rubio rises to national prominence, he will gain the attention of the Hispanic community. Having someone like Rubio gain popularity within that voting bloc, lose the nomination and then campaign for the nominee would be beneficial. The estimates that I have seen show that there were around 12 million Hispanic voters this year. Being able to get just 10% more of those voters would be a sizable swing.

[hillertexas]

..

[rpfocus]

Sigh, Birthirism again? Rubio is eligible. If you don't accept Title 8 as valid, buy some guns, declare your house as an independent nation, and secede from the Union.

[erowe1]

A natural born citizen is anyone who has been a citizen since their birth. Rubio was born in the US as a citizen. Thus he is a natural born citizen.

[hillertexas]

..

[jclay2]

The fact that he might not be eligible due to citizenship requirements just further emboldens my belief that he will be the republican's guy in 2016. Its rubio vs hillary without a doubt.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

How about attacking Rubio on his neo-con agenda and win over people that way?

[hillertexas]

..

[hillertexas]

Rubio voted for Obama’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which allows the military to arrest any citizen without a warrant, trial or lawyer.

[Odin]

The Constitution does not define Natural Born Citizen as far as I'm aware.

It seems as though the de facto definition is anyone who was born a citizen.

[rpfocus]

This is about Article 2 Section 1 of the United States Constitution which is the supreme law of the land

https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/natural-born-citizen/

And what, pray tell, is "birthirism"?

The only reply needed is: Title 8. If you don't accept that it is valid, then best of luck to you.

[hillertexas]

..

[hillertexas]

..

[Confederate]

The Constitution does not define Natural Born Citizen as far as I'm aware.

It seems as though the de facto definition is anyone who was born a citizen.

It is.

[Brian4Liberty]

Marco Rubio Is NOT Eligible To Be President or VP

This is a counter-productive strategy.

[hillertexas]

This is a counter-productive strategy.

If you really feel that way......posts deleted.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Rubio voted for Obama’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which allows the military to arrest any citizen without a warrant, trial or lawyer.

Like I said previously, attack Rubio on these grounds.

[Tod]

Can't we just talk about his positions on the issues? The topic of the OP is not going to become an issue whether it should be or not.

[Tod]

Like I said previously, attack Rubio on these grounds.

Outside of RP supporters, I can't seem to find anyone that gets excited about the NDAA topic. :( Of course, between now and the next election that may change. :eek:

[MelissaWV]

Rubio has plenty of legit skeletons in his closet, and some of them do have to do with how he uses the "poor persecuted immigrant parents" story to his advantage. Most of the problems have to do with legislation, though I agree with Tod that the average person's eyes glaze over if you talk about NDAA.

[Confederate]

Outside of RP supporters, I can't seem to find anyone that gets excited about the NDAA topic. :( Of course, between now and the next election that may change. :eek:

NDAA has to be pinned on Obama for the GOP base to react to it.

[John F Kennedy III]

Bump

[alucard13mmfmj]

GOP has to make a decision... rubio for hispanic votes OR rand paul for youth votes from all races.

I dont think the public is that retarded to not see that the only reason why GOP wuodl consider rubio is to cater to the hispanic vote. that is quite racist and insulting to hispanics imo.

Rand Paul President
Rubio for VP... it might come down to that.

[John F Kennedy III]

If he is not a natural born citizen and Obama isn't either, yet no one does anything about it then what is to stop the man picked by the elite IMO to be the next president of the USA from becoming president in 2016 just because he was a born in Austria? I know the Constitution prohibits it, but they ignore the Constitution so regularly and might even try to change it by 2016 to allow any US citizen to run for president.

I am talking about Arnold Schwarzenegger.

You think Arnold is going to run?

[Pisces]

Wasn't Arnold pretty much a disaster as a governor?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

It will be so funny if, 3.5 years from now, we have left-wing birthers. More proof that the fringe left and fringe right are more identical to one another than either of them think they are.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

If he is not a natural born citizen and Obama isn't either, yet no one does anything about it then what is to stop the man picked by the elite IMO to be the next president of the USA from becoming president in 2016 just because he was a born in Austria? I know the Constitution prohibits it, but they ignore the Constitution so regularly and might even try to change it by 2016 to allow any US citizen to run for president.

I am talking about Arnold Schwarzenegger.

There is a big difference between Obama/Rubio and Schwarzenegger. Obama was born in Hawaii, Rubio in Florida and Schwarzenegger in Austria. People debating over Rubio are using the B.S. argument that one needs to born in America with two parents who are U.S. citizens at the time. They just made that definition of "natural born" up, as neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court has ever explicitly implied that that is what it takes to be considered natural born.

But there is no doubt whatsoever you have to be born in the U.S. Schwarzenegger wasn't. He's not qualified under our Constitution (born in U.S.; have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years and be at least 35 years old) as it stands.

[John F Kennedy III]

There's no such thing as a native-born citizen according to the Constitution. There's natural born (as in - was a citizen when born) and naturalized (As in, became a citizen by being granted the status by a court.)

And there's also no legal precedent for your definition that I'm aware of, while my definition has hundreds of years of American and English common law. Rubio was born here, he's eligible.

Sorry JFK, but even though I realize this won't change anybody's mind, this isn't Ron Paul's position on the issue, and honestly, makes us look like nutjobs.

You know I've never been afraid of being called a nutjob :p

Currently I'm still trying to gather all the facts. I know they will run him no matter what if want to.

[John F Kennedy III]

1000% Correct.

Look I know everyone is chomping at the bit to discredit Rubio, but there is no need to do so. We want Rubio to be a strong contender for the nomination, and we want Rand to be able to defeat him without resorting to "low blows" such as questioning his eligibility. We aren't trying to backdoor Rand into the nomination, we want him to win decisively by demonstrating to the voters that he is by far and away the best man for the job.

Why do we want Rubio to be a strong contender?

[John F Kennedy III]

Fair enough - I want to see it, we should want to see it, because it benefits the goal. The reason being is that at this time, he is considered one of the top tier contenders, if not the leading contender. A candidate wins mass support in the party, and with Independent voters, by demonstrating he is the best person for the job. Rand can do that.

Rubio performing well, but losing, in the primaries can also help Rand when it comes to chipping away at the 70% of Hispanics that vote Democratic. If Rubio rises to national prominence, he will gain the attention of the Hispanic community. Having someone like Rubio gain popularity within that voting bloc, lose the nomination and then campaign for the nominee would be beneficial. The estimates that I have seen show that there were around 12 million Hispanic voters this year. Being able to get just 10% more of those voters would be a sizable swing.

So you want a Rand/Rubio ticket?

[John F Kennedy III]

This is a counter-productive strategy.

Why?

[CaptLouAlbano]

Why do we want Rubio to be a strong contender?

Because defeating a strong contender shows the strength of our candidate. The stronger the competition, the stronger the eventual winner. Think of Boise State football. They have an incredible record, yet never get the ranking due to them because of their schedule. An undefeated team with weak competition is ranked lower than a team with an 11-3 record with strong competition.

Plus, if Rubio lasts through the early contests it will draw some attention from the Hispanic bloc. They voted 70% for Obama this year. Having Rubio gain some notoriety, losing graciously to Rand, then endorsing and campaigning for him might be a means by which we can chip away at that 70%. 10% of that vote could amount to 1 million votes for Rand that he might not otherwise get. Rubio is a good solider for the party, if he loses he will be out there pushing the ticket as hard as anyone else.

[Brian4Liberty]

Why?

A. It won't work.
B. It would be spun as anti-Hispanic.

[John F Kennedy III]

A. It won't work.
B. It would be spun as anti-Hispanic.

People are ridiculous.

I still don't know if Rubio is Constitutionally eligible to be President. I'd like some clarification on that.

[CaptLouAlbano]

So you want a Rand/Rubio ticket?

Not particularly. I do think having either a women or a Hispanic on the ticket is going to be pretty much essential come 2016. I have a hard time believing that two white men from the South can win in this climate, regardless of who they are.

[John F Kennedy III]

Not particularly. I do think having either a women or a Hispanic on the ticket is going to be pretty much essential come 2016. I have a hard time believing that two white men from the South can win in this climate, regardless of who they are.

Hmmmm. Rand/

/Rubio

/Tim Scott

/Devon Patrick

[John F Kennedy III]

People are ridiculous.

I still don't know if Rubio is Constitutionally eligible to be President. I'd like some clarification on that.

^^^

[Carehn]

So what is a natural born citizen?

Someone who is born naturally and not through a caesarean section.

[Peace&Freedom]

Rubio is not constitutionally qualified to become President, as per the understanding of natural born citizen of the Founders. There is a distinction in the law between a statutory US citizen or US person, and a sovereign state citizen (the latter was the reference point of the Founders and early American understanding). The 'US' statutorily, is someone who is literally domiciled in DC and the federal territories, NOT the states. The Founders conceived of it as somebody born in one of the states, whose parents' allegiance was also undividedly to this country. People from the Founders' time were grandfathered, otherwise all else are subject to this understanding. It is the constitutional definition that is relevant if we follow original intent, not the statutory definition that came later.

If we want to disregard this, then let's properly amend the Constitution to resolve the difference between the two, not junk the original framework in an unconstitutional fashion. That is the same kind of thinking that junks the Constitution on every other point, wherever it become inconvenient to us. Are we going to be faithful to the document only where we are comfortable with it, but junk it where we don't want to be perceived as nuts? I refuse to adopt an al a carte approach to constitutional issues. Rubio is not qualified.

[RonZeplin]

I'd like some clarification on that.
Vattel “Law of Nations’ Is the Key and It Is Now Verified: Updated with Footnote at the Conclusion
https://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/vattel-law-of-nations-is-the-key-and-it-is-now-verified/

McCain was not born on a US military base, but in a Panamanian hospital off base. Bill Richardson is ineligible too even though he was born in Pasadena CA, due to his mother being a Mexican citizen.

[John F Kennedy III]

Rubio is not constitutionally qualified to become President, as per the understanding of natural born citizen of the Founders. There is a distinction in the law between a statutory US citizen or US person, and a sovereign state citizen (the latter was the reference point of the Founders and early American understanding). The 'US' statutorily, is someone who is literally domiciled in DC and the federal territories, NOT the states. The Founders conceived of it as somebody born in one of the states, whose parents' allegiance was also undividedly to this country. People from the Founders' time were grandfathered, otherwise all else are subject to this understanding. It is the constitutional definition that is relevant if we follow original intent, not the statutory definition that came later.

If we want to disregard this, then let's properly amend the Constitution to resolve the difference between the two, not junk the original framework in an unconstitutional fashion. That is the same kind of thinking that junks the Constitution on every other point, wherever it become inconvenient to us. Are we going to be faithful to the document only where we are comfortable with it, but junk it where we don't want to be perceived as nuts? I refuse to adopt an al a carte approach to constitutional issues. Rubio is not qualified.

Thank you.

[John F Kennedy III]

Vattel “Law of Nations’ Is the Key and It Is Now Verified: Updated with Footnote at the Conclusion
https://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/vattel-law-of-nations-is-the-key-and-it-is-now-verified/

McCain was not born on a US military base, but in a Panamanian hospital off base. Bill Richardson is ineligible too even though he was born in Pasadena CA, due to his mother being a Mexican citizen.

Thanks. Is it verified that neither of Rubio's parents were citizens when he was born?

[jcannon98188]

The Repugs were not even willing to seriously raise the Issue regarding BHO. The Reality that McCain R in 2008, Mittens R in 2012 and BHO D 2008 & 2012 are all Constitutionally ineligible to be Prez in exactly the same way is no accident. They were chosen by our Rulers for a pupose.

Mitt Romney was too eligible. His father was still an American Citizen (their family never gave up their citizenship) and Mitt was born in America.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Rubio was born here, he's eligible.

And so were American Indians, and they aren't citizens even under the 14th (or at least weren't traditionally).

Being born in a country doesn't make you a citizen, otherwise diplomats or illegals who aren't citizens would have babies that were, and then would go back to their country to raise them - and they wouldn't be citizens of their own countries. Absurd. Even the 14th says "you have to be under the jurisdiction of", and you aren't if your parents aren't.

But traditionally, it was simply by inheritance. Just like the Constitution says "ourselves and our Posterity" in the pre-amble.

[RickyJ]

You think Arnold is going to run?

I know he wants to, and if he could I think he would win easily. When the truth is finally revealed that Obama was born in Kenya and therefore was ineligible to be president, Obama's supporters will go nuts if they try to remove him. To appease them they will try to change the Constitution so anyone that has been a citizen for at least 30 years or so is eligible to be President of the USA. I know he sucked as Governor of California, but most people that vote don't care about facts like that. Obama sucked as US Senator and a State Senator as well as President of the USA for 4 years, yet most people didn't care.

[KingRobbStark]

If he is not a natural born citizen and Obama isn't either, yet no one does anything about it then what is to stop the man picked by the elite IMO to be the next president of the USA from becoming president in 2016 just because he was a born in Austria? I know the Constitution prohibits it, but they ignore the Constitution so regularly and might even try to change it by 2016 to allow any US citizen to run for president.

I am talking about Arnold Schwarzenegger.

He can never be president. He has an accent.

[rprprs]

...Sorry JFK, but even though I realize this won't change anybody's mind, this isn't Ron Paul's position on the issue, and honestly, makes us look like nutjobs.


This is a counter-productive strategy.
Agree. I am of the belief that Republican association with this argument helped, rather than hindered, the re-election of Obama.

[Tudo]

They can do whatever they want to do and nobody is going to fight them.

If this "election" didn't teach you that

[jtap]

Too much time is wasted on this "are they eligible citizens to be president" crap. Why have tiers of citizenship anyway? If a person becomes an American why not let them be eligible for president? Isn't the fact that it costs almost a billion dollars to become president enough of a blockade already?

It seems hypocritical that the process that people go through to become an American doesn't make you as qualified as "native-born citizens". Why not? what was the intent and reason behind this rule? Too much time is wasted on arguing this. I say get rid of that requirement. Nothing will really change if all American citizens over the age of 35 who have lived here for 14 years are eligible...well some things will change; threads like this, people being portrayed as crazy for wanting to know the truth and maybe (hopefully) Donald Trump, will go away.

[hillertexas]

what was the intent and reason behind this rule?

"Our founding fathers were worried about infiltration and especially British subjects wheedling their way into power and then undermining everything they fought for in the Revolutionary War. They most clearly were concerned with people having been born with dual loyalties getting into the presidency and then taking us to war or using America with other countries interest in mind. And at worst they were worried about sabotage.

Almost anyone can be a senator, a congressman, a lobbyist... they can be a billionaire banker. They just can't be president with dual loyalties. Justice John Jay (one of our founding fathers) wrote George Washington about this very thing during the writing of the constitution. You can read his letter online.

We are a very inclusionary government. Name some other country's government that will allow you to be President, King, Dictator, or whatever without being natural born or basically an inside dude. They do this so they don't get toppled by infiltrators."

[UMULAS]

"Our founding fathers were worried about infiltration and especially British subjects wheedling their way into power and then undermining everything they fought for in the Revolutionary War. They most clearly were concerned with people having been born with dual loyalties getting into the presidency and then taking us to war or using America with other countries interest in mind. And at worst they were worried about sabotage.

Almost anyone can be a senator, a congressman, a lobbyist... they can be a billionaire banker. They just can't be president with Duel Loyalties. Justice John Jay (one of our founding fathers) wrote George Washington about this very thing during the writing of the constitution. You can read his letter online.

We are a very inclusionary government. Name some other country's government that will allow you to be president, King, dictator or whatever without being natural born or basically an inside dude. They do this so they don't get toppled by infiltrators."

Oh because we have loyalists in Congress :D

Our founding fathers did not include this, this was after the civil war. If there is a person that is loyal to our country AND wants to run for any office, then they should.

[hillertexas]

Our founding fathers did not include this

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.
-Article II, Section 1 U.S. Constitution

[Confederate]

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.
-Article II, Section 1 U.S. Constitution

How does that exclude Rubio? Was he born in the US? Yes. He's eligible.

[UMULAS]

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.
-Article II, Section 1 U.S. Constitution

They did not define natural born citizen, therefore it can be as that a person living here for 30 years (any number really) can be a naturally born citizen.

And in the 14th Amendment Section 1 States:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So if they are naturalized, then they have the right to run for President.

[Confederate]

They did not define natural born citizen, therefore it can be as that a person living here for 30 years (any number really) can be a naturally born citizen.

And in the 14th Amendment Section 1 States:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So if they are naturalized, then they have the right to run for President.

How can a naturalized citizen be born a citizen?

[jkob]

Starting 'birther' crap with Rubio would be a mistake. They'll paint all his detractors as cooks and him as the reasonable choice, try to make him out to be the Republican Obama. He was born in the United States and most people would be consider him a natural born citizen. We can beat him on the issues, don't fall for their traps.

[cindy25]

Rubio is a natural born citizen

he should be defeated but not by this.

[UMULAS]

How can a naturalized citizen be born a citizen?

Simple, after a x number of years a person can be granted the same rights as a natural born citizen.

[Zippyjuan]

His parents were born in Cuba but he was born in Miami, Florida which is in the USA. That makes him a natural born citizen. Must be a slow day when this is a big issue.

[jkr]

DOESNT MATTER i wont vote 4 him
period

i have had enough of alien influence in the gubbermint

[UMULAS]

DOESNT MATTER i wont vote 4 him
period

i have had enough of alien influence in the gubbermint

Wanna purify our country back to the roots of anglo saxon protestanism...? Then join Stormfront today!

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTa-r-MApIttLSBAPmB9S3jaR4VglN0OOp3Tc2SLEW1i9BwbS6u_Q

[aGameOfThrones]

Oh because we have loyalists in Congress :D

Our founding fathers did not include this, this was after the civil war. If there is a person that is loyal to our country AND wants to run for any office, then they should.

http://invertedsoapbox.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/arnold_vote4me.jpg

[UMULAS]

http://invertedsoapbox.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/arnold_vote4me.jpg

Although I disagree with every issue he does, I should not have the right to detain representation from office that which people want to be represented by him just because I believe that only natural born citizens should run for office.

[erowe1]

Simple, after a x number of years a person can be granted the same rights as a natural born citizen.

That would require amending the Constitution, since it limits the president to natural born citizens.

[Peace&Freedom]

His parents were born in Cuba but he was born in Miami, Florida which is in the USA. That makes him a natural born citizen. Must be a slow day when this is a big issue.

No, must be a slow mind not mentioning all factors. In addition to place of birth, the parents must not have dual loyalties under the constitutional/Founders' understanding of natural born citizen. The controlling factor here is the constitution, not the statues, public opinion, or political considerations. The fact that we are discussing this question about persons who are NOT Obama/Barry shows those raising the issue are being consistent and principled.

This will remain an issue, regardless of what people think about it up or down, until the Constitution is properly revised to update the definitions. If we belittle it, we are saying unqualified persons occupying the White House don't matter. If we choose to disregard it, then we have lost the right to complain when hack politicians disregard the Constitution on any other matter.

[erowe1]

No, must be a slow mind not mentioning all factors. In addition to place of birth, the parents must not have dual loyalties under the constitutional/Founders' understanding of natural born citizen. The controlling factor here is the constitution, not the statues, public opinion, or political considerations. The fact that we are discussing this question about persons who are NOT Obama/Barry shows those raising the issue are being consistent and principled.

This will remain an issue, regardless of what people think about it up or down, until the Constitution is properly revised to update the definitions. If we belittle it, we are saying unqualified persons occupying the White House don't matter.

A natural born citizen is anyone who has been a citizen since their birth. That's what the phrase means, and that's what it meant when it was written in the original Constitution.

The laws defining who is a citizen at birth can change. But the meaning of the phrase "natural born citizen" has always been that.



If we choose to disregard it, then we have lost the right to complain when hack politicians disregard the Constitution on any other matter.

Hogwash. Whenever we are wronged we have a right to complain and to defend ourselves, with violence if necessary. Writing down on some piece of paper that it's ok for the government to wrong us doesn't make it so. The basis for our complaints against the federal government should always be rooted in ultimate standards of right and wrong. Any mention of the Constitution should be based on pragmatism, not on the pretense that we need the Constitution on our side in order to have a case.

[Confederate]

No, must be a slow mind not mentioning all factors. In addition to place of birth, the parents must not have dual loyalties under the constitutional/Founders' understanding of natural born citizen. The controlling factor here is the constitution, not the statues, public opinion, or political considerations. The fact that we are discussing this question about persons who are NOT Obama/Barry shows those raising the issue are being consistent and principled.

This will remain an issue, regardless of what people think about it up or down, until the Constitution is properly revised to update the definitions. If we belittle it, we are saying unqualified persons occupying the White House don't matter. If we choose to disregard it, then we have lost the right to complain when hack politicians disregard the Constitution on any other matter.

It says nothing in the Constitution about your parents needing to be citizens or that even you can't be a dual citizen to be a natural born citizen and eligible to run for president.

[UMULAS]

That would require amending the Constitution, since it limits the president to natural born citizens.

I believe there might be a Supreme Court Decision on this; they were supposed to do it on Arnold Schwarzenegger but it got dropped.

[Zippyjuan]

No, must be a slow mind not mentioning all factors. In addition to place of birth, the parents must not have dual loyalties under the constitutional/Founders' understanding of natural born citizen. The controlling factor here is the constitution, not the statues, public opinion, or political considerations. The fact that we are discussing this question about persons who are NOT Obama/Barry shows those raising the issue are being consistent and principled.

This will remain an issue, regardless of what people think about it up or down, until the Constitution is properly revised to update the definitions. If we belittle it, we are saying unqualified persons occupying the White House don't matter. If we choose to disregard it, then we have lost the right to complain when hack politicians disregard the Constitution on any other matter.

Can you show where it says this (Hint- that definition is not in the US Constitution)?

The controlling factor here is the constitution,

[Zippyjuan]

I believe there might be a Supreme Court Decision on this; they were supposed to do it on Arnold Schwarzenegger but it got dropped.

Arnold was naturalized a citizen but since he was born in Austria he could never be considered a Natural Born Citizen. This would not have been a Supreme Court issue.

When Clinton was president, his Secretary of State was Madeline Albright. Her position put her fourth in succession to the Presidency but she could not have taken the job since she was born in what was then Czechoslavakia.

[UMULAS]

Arnold was naturalized a citizen but since he was born in Austria he could never be considered a Natural Born Citizen. This would not have been a Supreme Court issue.

When Clinton was president, his Secretary of State was Madeline Albright. Her position put her fourth in succession to the Presidency but she could not have taken the job since she was born in what was then Czechoslavakia.

Since the constitution did not have the definition of natural born citizen, it is up for the SCOTUS to define it.

[erowe1]

Since the constitution did not have the definition of natural born citizen, it is up for the SCOTUS to define it.

While it's altogether possible that SCOTUS will decide that it means something totally different than what it actually means (and in fact doing that would be par for the course for SCOTUS), it is not the case that the phrase doesn't have an actual set meaning. Nor is it the case that it has to be defined in the Constitution to have a meaning. If that were true, then the Constitution could never mean anything at all no matter what it said, since it would have to define all of its own language, including the language it uses when it defines other language.

The phrase natural-born was already a meaningful phrase in English long before the Constitution was written. Here's the entry for it in the Oxford English Dictionary. Note the usage going back to the 1500's, including an example from Thomas Jefferson in 1776.

natural-born, adj.
View as: Outline |Full entryQuotations: Show all |Hide all
Pronunciation: Brit. /ˌnatʃ(ə)rəlˈbɔːn/ , /ˌnatʃ(ə)rl̩ˈbɔːn/ , U.S. /ˈnætʃər(ə)lˈbɔ(ə)rn/ , /ˈnætʃr(ə)lˈbɔ(ə)rn/
Forms: see natural adj. and born adj.
Etymology: < natural adj. + born adj. Compare earlier ... (Show More)
Thesaurus »

1. Having a specified position, nationality, etc., by birth; native-born. See naturally born adj. at naturally adv. 11a. Cf. also natural adj. 14a.

1583 W. Cecil Execution of Iustice sig. E.iii, D. Sanders a natural borne Subiect but an unnaturall worne priest.
1598 W. Phillip tr. J. H. van Linschoten Disc. Voy. E. & W. Indies i. xxix. 53/2 The children of Mestiços are of colour and fashion like the naturall borne Countrimen.
1625 in H. L'Estrange Reign King Charles (1655) 21 Divers of the naturall-born subjects of this Kingdome..do..claim precedency of the Peers of this Realm.
1695 Act 7 & 8 Will. III (1696) 478 A Natural born Subject of this Realm..Who shall be willing to Enter and Register himself for the Service of His Majesty.
1709 Act 7 Anne c. 5 §3 The Children of all natural-born Subjects, born out of the Ligeance of her Majesty..shall be deemed..to be natural-born Subjects of this Kingdom.
1776 in T. Jefferson Public Papers 344 All persons who..propose to reside..and who shall subscribe the fundamental laws, shall be considered as residents and entitled to all the rights of persons natural born.
1833 Penny Cycl. I. 338/2 It is not true that every person, born out of the dominion of the crown, is therefore an alien; nor is a person born within them necessarily a natural-born subject.
1866 G. Bancroft Hist. U.S. IX. xxvi. 439 Every one who first saw the light on the American soil was a natural-born citizen.
1910 Encycl. Brit. I. 662/2 A natural-born British woman, having become an alien by marriage, and thereafter being a widow, may be rehabilitated under conditions slightly more favourable than are required for naturalization.
1965 New Statesman 30 Apr. 670/2 He proclaims proudly, in a modulated Birmingham accent that makes him sound like a well-bred Australian: ‘I'm a natural born Brummie.’
2001 Hong Kong Imail (Nexis) 23 July, The territory's highest court ruled that only natural-born Hong Kong children were entitled to the right of abode.
(Hide quotations)


2. Having a specified character or constitution from birth. Cf. born adj. 5b.

1835 J. P. Kennedy Horse-shoe Robinson I. xiii. 251 Wat talks like a natural born fool.
1897 M. Kingsley Trav. W. Afr. 137 The chief being a natural-born idiot, came with two of his head men.
1918 W. Cather My Ántonia iv. iii. 359 Ántonia is a natural-born mother. I wish she could marry and raise a family, but I don't know as there's much chance now.
1958 J. Kerouac On Road 71 Everybody in America is a natural-born thief.
1994 Gazette (Montreal) 5 Nov. j1/4 The authors..present Trudeau as a natural-born, big ‘L’ Liberal instead of a trendy rich socialist.

So if SCOTUS were to rule that Arnold makes the cut, SCOTUS would be wrong.

[RonPaulMall]

No, must be a slow mind not mentioning all factors. In addition to place of birth, the parents must not have dual loyalties under the constitutional/Founders' understanding of natural born citizen. The controlling factor here is the constitution, not the statues, public opinion, or political considerations. The fact that we are discussing this question about persons who are NOT Obama/Barry shows those raising the issue are being consistent and principled.


The problem with your position is that there is hardly any evidence as to what the founders' understanding of a "natural born citizen" was. At the time of our nation's founding, the concept of citizenship was in a state of flux. Traditionally, since Roman times, citizenship had been based on blood. But the opening of the new world sparked a transition towards the concept of citizenship by land, particularly among the British. So you can't really say what the founders would have thought, and within just a few decades the idea of citizenship tied to land was the norm throughout the English speaking world. Today it is so ingrained that the entire argument would seem absurd to most Americans, which is why this "controversy" will never spread beyond the fringes of right wing internet.

[truelies]

The problem with your position is that there is hardly any evidence as to what the founders' understanding of a "natural born citizen" was. ...................................

The Founders had an excellent understand of what they thought of as a natural born citizen and why it is a necessary qualification for the Presidency. Information regarding their viewpoint is readily available. problem is your inexcuseable ignorance and/or your obscurancy.

[erowe1]

The Founders had an excellent understand [sic] of what they thought of as a natural born citizen and why it is a necessary qualification for the Presidency. Information regarding their viewpoint is readily available. problem [sic] is your inexcuseable [sic] ignorance and/or your obscurancy [sic].

Speaking of which, did you mean to say "obduracy" or "obscurantism"?

[Liberty74]

Rubio is ELIGIBLE.

Stop with the nonsense people. Geez....

From Section 1 Article Two


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.

Natural born citizen does not mean both parents must have been born in the U.S. Just YOU!!! Rubio was, Obama was not. Nuff said!

Why are people so scared of a Cuban heritage guy from FL? So many in here remind me of Bill Clinton freaking out being scared of Rubio that the womanizer went down to FL during the 2010 Senate race to get the Democrat out of the race so Indy Charlie could beat Rubio. Rubio won 50% of the vote in a 3 way race.

[truelies]

How does that exclude Rubio? Was he born in the US? Yes. He's eligible.
His parents were citizens of cuba at the time of his birth and hence he is ineligible to be prez. Born in the USA gets you birth right citizenship under current twisting of the law , but does NOT make one an NBC

[erowe1]

His parents were citizens of cuba at the time of his birth and hence he is ineligible to be prez. Born in the USA gets you birth right citizenship under current twisting of the law , but does NOT make one an NBC

Yes it does. If being born in the US makes you a citizen at the time of your birth, then, by definition, your citizenship is natural-born.

[erowe1]

Rubio is ELIGIBLE.

Stop with the nonsense people. Geez....

From Section 1 Article Two



Natural born citizen does not mean both parents must have been born in the U.S. Just YOU!!! Rubio was, Obama was not. Nuff said!

Why are people so scared of a Cuban heritage guy from FL? So many in here remind me of Bill Clinton freaking out being scared of Rubio that the womanizer went down to FL during the 2010 Senate race to get the Democrat out of the race so Indy Charlie could beat Rubio. Rubio won 50% of the vote in a 3 way race.

I'm right there with you on natural-born citizen.

But the other stuff you're saying, where it looks like you're saying we shouldn't be doing all we can to sink a Rubio candidacy...that has me a little concerned for you.

[Zippyjuan]

There are two ways to become a citizen. One is by birth (natural born) and the second is to be naturalized or to go though an application process. Natural born does not list any requirement that the parents (one or both) be US citizens. A person is either 1) a citizen by birth, 2) a naturalized citizen, or 3) not a citizen. The Constitution requires that the President be a natural born citizen (citizen by birth) and allows candidates for other offices (Senators or Congressmen) to be citizens but not necessarily by birth- they can be naturalized citizens as well. No other levels or requirements of citizenship are mentioned in the US Constitution.

[Peace&Freedom]

Can you show where it says this (Hint- that definition is not in the US Constitution)?

Reverse hint, I pointed out the original intent of the Founders behind the concept, included the understanding regarding the allegiance of the parents. You latched on to the one phrase where I left out the Founder's intent. Birth AND parental allegiance is the historical context for understanding 'natural born citizen.'

[John F Kennedy III]

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.

Does the bolded part mean Rubio IS eligible? It would seem so as long as he is a citizen of the United States.

Or do we need to define original intent of the word "citizen"?

[aGameOfThrones]

Does the bolded part mean Rubio IS eligible? It would seem so as long as he is a citizen of the United States.

Or do we need to define original intent of the word "citizen"?

Some say there is a difference between Citizen and citizen.

[69360]

The intent of the natural born citizen clause was to prevent having a CIC of the military with a foreign allegiance. If you think Rubio is eligible simply because he was born here to non citizen parents, what's to stop a North Korean, Iranian, Russian etc from sneaking across the border and giving birth to a child who could be a sleeper agent and eligible to be our president? What if a situation arose where we had to bomb Cuba? Would Rubio be able to order it or does he have other allegiances? The intent was very clear and Rubio is not eligible just for passing out a vagina on US soil.

[UMULAS]

While it's altogether possible that SCOTUS will decide that it means something totally different than what it actually means (and in fact doing that would be par for the course for SCOTUS), it is not the case that the phrase doesn't have an actual set meaning. Nor is it the case that it has to be defined in the Constitution to have a meaning. If that were true, then the Constitution could never mean anything at all no matter what it said, since it would have to define all of its own language, including the language it uses when it defines other language.



So if SCOTUS were to rule that Arnold makes the cut, SCOTUS would be wrong.

The constitution was made to be flexible and interpreted by many so it would have been able to keep the republic alive; there is no strict interpretation of the Constitution. There is still no information stating what do we define a person that is "born here", can it be a person living here for x number of years that would be able to grant them natural born citizenship; the constitution doesn't say, it was left for interpretation, so if SCOTUS defines it, then they are correct.

[UMULAS]

The intent of the natural born citizen clause was to prevent having a CIC of the military with a foreign allegiance. If you think Rubio is eligible simply because he was born here to non citizen parents, what's to stop a North Korean, Iranian, Russian etc from sneaking across the border and giving birth to a child who could be a sleeper agent and eligible to be our president? What if a situation arose where we had to bomb Cuba? Would Rubio be able to order it or does he have other allegiances? The intent was very clear and Rubio is not eligible just for passing out a vagina on US soil.

So what? Should we prohibit black people from running office just because there is a good chance that one of them has hate towards white people due to the era of Slavery? You can be an American with five other generations of American blood, but that will not mean you are a patriot; you can even be a terrorist or just have allegiance with any other country

EDIT:

I am not a racist, just giving an example of how crazy of excluding a group of people for "safety".

[Valli6]

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.
Does the bolded part mean Rubio IS eligible? It would seem so as long as he is a citizen of the United States.

Or do we need to define original intent of the word "citizen"?

I believe the sentence is supposed to be read this way:

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;
The founders intended that a only natural born citizen be president. However, "at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution" (1787), the founders themselves had all been born British subjects, even though they may have been born on this continent. They did not consider themselves natural born citizens, so needed to exclude themselves from this rule in order to have men eligible for the presidency in the early years.

Rubio was not born in the late 1700's, so he needs to be more than "a Citizen of the United States" to qualify - he needs to be a "natural born" Citizen of the United States.

The fact that his parents were not American citizens when he was born here, calls into question whether or not he can be considered a "natural born" citizen. This is about dual loyalties. Traditionally, citizenship is conferred on a child through the parents, or just the father. This point can be argued, but it is wrong to simply ignore the Constitution's intent or to ridicule those who point out the fact.

That said, the establishment prefers to distract from the citizenship issue with misinformation and ridicule. I have little doubt they'd be happy to simply legalize swapping our own corrupt leaders with those of other countries, making it easier to maintain a single, ongoing power structure worldwide. (Kind of like it seems now.)

This is certainly not the best issue to lead an attack with - and there is so much other evidence of this man's incompetence to focus on, I say drop it... at least for now.

[69360]

So what? Should we prohibit black people from running office just because there is a good chance that one of them has hate towards white people due to the era of Slavery? You can be an American with five other generations of American blood, but that will not mean you are a patriot; you can even be a terrorist or just have allegiance with any other country.

Nonetheless, the intent is clear. It's not perfect of course, you can have people like John Walker Lindh who turn against their country despite being a natural born citizens. But being a child of citizens you statistically are many many times more likely to be loyal to your country of birth than a child of non-citizen parents. So the natural born clause as written and intended by the founding fathers is very effective.

[ClydeCoulter]

Does the bolded part mean Rubio IS eligible? It would seem so as long as he is a citizen of the United States.

Or do we need to define original intent of the word "citizen"?

"or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution"

That was to cover people that were citizens at that time but not necessarily natural born citizens. How many citizens were natural born then? (father and mother citizens and them born here)?

edit: ^^ I see Valli6 covered this already ^^

I have a question, does the constitution say that your parents need to be here legally for a person to be born here and be a citizen?

[UMULAS]

Nonetheless, the intent is clear. It's not perfect of course, you can have people like John Walker Lindh who turn against their country despite being a natural born citizens. But being a child of citizens you statistically are many many times more likely to be loyal to your country of birth than a child of non-citizen parents. So the natural born clause as written and intended by the founding fathers is very effective.

Oh, we are using "statistics" now are we? We might as well exclude blacks due to the civil war, Jews due to Israel, Muslims due to the Middle East, and LGBT due to hate crimes in the South. The intent is clear, it is for aristocracy; a person did not choose where they were to be born, but they can choose to whose allegiance they want to be with.

This is idea for the sake of "safety" is startling; we might as well have no rights and extend the Patriot act and the NDAA in order to have more "safety".

Those willing to give up liberty for security deserve niether and will lose both - Benjamin Franklin

EDIT: Not a racist, just giving an example.

[hillertexas]

Wanna purify our country back to the roots of anglo saxon protestanism...? Then join Stormfront today!

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTa-r-MApIttLSBAPmB9S3jaR4VglN0OOp3Tc2SLEW1i9BwbS6u_Q


So what? Should we prohibit black people from running office...


We might as well exclude blacks due to the civil war,

It's interesting that you are so preoccupied with "blacks" as if that has anything to do with the question at hand. You do realize that us discussing Marco Rubio's eligibility has nothing to do with his skin color, right?

[NIU Students for Liberty]

The intent of the natural born citizen clause was to prevent having a CIC of the military with a foreign allegiance. If you think Rubio is eligible simply because he was born here to non citizen parents, what's to stop a North Korean, Iranian, Russian etc from sneaking across the border and giving birth to a child who could be a sleeper agent and eligible to be our president? What if a situation arose where we had to bomb Cuba? Would Rubio be able to order it or does he have other allegiances? The intent was very clear and Rubio is not eligible just for passing out a vagina on US soil.

I didn't realize Marco Rubio had become a villain from 24.

[69360]

It's interesting that you are so preoccupied with "blacks" as if that has anything to do with the question at hand. You do realize that us discussing Marco Rubio's eligibility has nothing to do with his skin color, right?

He's preoccupied with black/brown/pink/blue people because it's a lot easier to call somebody a racist than follow the constitution as it was written and intended.

[John F Kennedy III]

I believe the sentence is supposed to be read this way:

The founders intended that a only natural born citizen be president. However, "at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution" (1787), the founders themselves had all been born British subjects, even though they may have been born on this continent. They did not consider themselves natural born citizens, so needed to exclude themselves from this rule in order to have men eligible for the presidency in the early years.

Rubio was not born in the late 1700's, so he needs to be more than "a Citizen of the United States" to qualify - he needs to be a "natural born" Citizen of the United States.

The fact that his parents were not American citizens when he was born here, calls into question whether or not he can be considered a "natural born" citizen. This is about dual loyalties. Traditionally, citizenship is conferred on a child through the parents, or just the father. This point can be argued, but it is wrong to simply ignore the Constitution's intent or to ridicule those who point out the fact.

That said, the establishment prefers to distract from the citizenship issue with misinformation and ridicule. I have little doubt they'd be happy to simply legalize swapping our own corrupt leaders with those of other countries, making it easier to maintain a single, ongoing power structure worldwide. (Kind of like it seems now.)

This is certainly not the best issue to lead an attack with - and there is so much other evidence of this man's incompetence to focus on, I say drop it... at least for now.

I've dropped it as something I will use unless I ever end up meeting someone who likes Rubio, but also wants to be 100% sure their President is actually qualified to hold the office. Or we stumble upon 1000% undeniable proof that he wasn't born on anything that can be considered U.S. Soil *crosses fingers*

[John F Kennedy III]

Wouldn't it be glorious if the Constitution was written like this:

No person except:

1. A natural born Citizen
2. 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.


Also I have a question: If you have to be a natural born citizen, why is there a 14 year clause?


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.

[cindy25]

Wouldn't it be glorious if the Constitution was written like this:

No person except:

1. A natural born Citizen
2. 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.


Also I have a question: If you have to be a natural born citizen, why is there a 14 year clause?

so someone could not be born in the USA, leave after that,and then suddenly come back and be president.

[John F Kennedy III]

so someone could not be born in the USA, leave after that,and then suddenly come back and be president.

Thank you.

[libertariantexas]

There's no such thing as a native-born citizen according to the Constitution. There's natural born (as in - was a citizen when born) and naturalized (As in, became a citizen by being granted the status by a court.)

And there's also no legal precedent for your definition that I'm aware of, while my definition has hundreds of years of American and English common law. Rubio was born here, he's eligible.

Sorry JFK, but even though I realize this won't change anybody's mind, this isn't Ron Paul's position on the issue, and honestly, makes us look like nutjobs.

Any attempt to keep Rubio out by claiming some esoteric argument of "not natural born" will be about as likely to fly as the birther nonsense against Obama. A small number of Conspiracy Theorists and extremist partisan nut jobs will believe it, and everyone else will ignore them.

Anyone born in this country will be considered eligible. If you don't like him, convince people to vote against him.

This CT nonsense is pointless.

[RonPaulMall]

Any attempt to keep Rubio out by claiming some esoteric argument of "not natural born" will be about as likely to fly as the birther nonsense against OThe bama. A small number of Conspiracy Theorists and extremist partisan nut jobs will believe it, and everyone else will ignore them.


It is not "as likely". Most Americans probably would agree that if Obama was born in Kenya he wouldn't be eligible to be President. The reason that never flew was because of lack of proof of what was being alleged. So there was at least a sliver of hope for the birthers. If they could have ever come up with solid proof Obama was Kenyan, they would have won the day. The Rubio issue is different. Almost no one in America, including the judiciary, accepts the OP's extremely restrictive definition of "natural born citizen". The birther argument carrying the day was unlikely. This argument carrying the day is utterly and completely inconceivable.

[UMULAS]

It's interesting that you are so preoccupied with "blacks" as if that has anything to do with the question at hand. You do realize that us discussing Marco Rubio's eligibility has nothing to do with his skin color, right?

I have no concern what so ever based on a someone's nationality, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, gender, color, height..; if they do the job well done then their is nothing to complain about. The reason why I said that was someone posted that their must be "safety" to be introduced in case of a person to be born here and hijack it to their natural country; it is absurd to believe that since anything crazy can happen such as a person whose family members were slaves in the civil war and the person running for President is still angered by this and will attack Whites.

Does that mean that people who are black can't run for Executive office due to "safety", of course the can. We must all look at the cases of the individual, not the lesser importance such as his color, race, nationality..etc. If Ron Paul was an immigrant I would have still supported him to run for office. I do not like Rubio, but attacking him with this will only cause collateral damage.

[jtap]

The intent of the natural born citizen clause was to prevent having a CIC of the military with a foreign allegiance. If you think Rubio is eligible simply because he was born here to non citizen parents, what's to stop a North Korean, Iranian, Russian etc from sneaking across the border and giving birth to a child who could be a sleeper agent and eligible to be our president? What if a situation arose where we had to bomb Cuba? Would Rubio be able to order it or does he have other allegiances? The intent was very clear and Rubio is not eligible just for passing out a vagina on US soil.


What's to stop them? My guess is the 35 years they have to wait for them to be eligible to pull off their clever ruse.

[truelies]

............... If being born in the US makes you a citizen at the time of your birth, then, by definition, your citizenship is natural-born.

not according to the Founders take on the Constitution which THEY NOT YOU wrote.

[truelies]

Sad to see that most so called libertarians care as little about the Constitution as full on socialist democrats.

[Confederate]

not according to the Founders take on the Constitution which THEY NOT YOU wrote.

go on...

[libertariantexas]

What's to stop them? My guess is the 35 years they have to wait for them to be eligible to pull off their clever ruse.

And then they'd still have to get the person elected. Pretty far fetched.

Almost as far fetched as believing a single American mother of a black "Kenyan" child fudged newspaper accounts to ensure that her black child, born in the days when blacks couldn't even drink at the "whites only" drinking fountain would one day become President and enslave the world.

Some people will believe almost any wild story/conspiracy theory if it fits their world view.