Conservative law professor Harris not qualified due to parents immigration status

[Scott Downey]

Unresolved constitutional issues should not be resolved by twitter posts.
Author of Kamala Harris birther op-ed in Newsweek says outlet didn't apologize for story

In the op-ed, Eastman's argument rests on the language of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The amendment says, "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," and he focuses on the specific clause "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

He argues that the clause means that people who are not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the country are not citizens, which he says extends to their children even if they were born on U.S. soil. In the case of Harris, her parents were from Jamaica and India, and she was born in California, but according to Eastman, whether she's a "natural-born citizen" remains unclear.

 

[Scott Downey]

Personally, I am not in favor of automatic unconditional birthright citizenship which also England rejected recently. And many countries also do not have such a thing.

One in four countries around the world grant birthright citizenship

 

[KenH]

United States v. Wong Kim Ark - 169 U.S. 649, 18 S. Ct. 456 (1898)

“U.S. Const. amend. XIV contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: Birth and naturalization. Citizenship by naturalization can only be acquired by naturalization under the authority and in the forms of law. But citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution. Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization. A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory; or by authority of Congress, exercised either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens by proceedings in the judicial tribunals, as in the ordinary provisions of the Naturalization Acts.

...

CONCLUSION:

The United States Supreme Court affirmed the writ of habeas corpus on the grounds that the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory was constitutionally enshrined.“

United States v. Wong Kim Ark | Case Brief for Law School | LexisNexis

 

[Scott Downey]

The people telling this nonsense lost this argument over President Obama and they will lose this one, too. Seriously, if you want to re-elect President Trump, then concentrate on the policy issues. If Biden-Harris win, then Senator Harris will become the next vice-president of the United States. Period.

My OP is not about whether she will or not be VP, it is of interest for me as in informational purposes, and is also my view, which I found out not everyone believes in unconditional birthright citizenship either.
What the world does with itself it just does, as it has been determined beforehand, and we are just walking it out.

25 Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things.
26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings,

 

[KenH]

The people telling this nonsense lost this argument over President Obama and they will lose this one, too. Seriously, if you want to re-elect President Trump, then concentrate on the policy issues. If Biden-Harris win, then Senator Harris will become the next vice-president of the United States. Period.

 

[Scott Downey]

Yeah well the times change dont they. Of course in the USA, seems to be becoming more radicalized with weird stuff and evil things, or is it that the loud mouths are having their day of fame since they scream louder than the other perhaps more silent majority. It is possible that millennials will be the doom of the country in the next decades, after the earlier generations have died out.. but I wont be here to live it, in 30 years I will be 91, and not sure I would want to live to see that. It could become like Sodom and Lot everywhere, not just in large liberal cities, or like Noah preaching righteousness to an utterly craven and wicked country. Only Noah, 8 persons survived the coming destruction.

"and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead—Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath."

 

[KenH]

not sure I would want to live to see that.

Personally, I prefer that Jesus return in this very next second and usher in the new heavens and earth. Not because of the conditions in the United States or any other country a now or in the future, but so it will be the end of sin and death and all of the results of the fall of man in the Garden of Eden.

 

[Scott Downey]

Personally, I prefer that Jesus return in this very next second and usher in the new heavens and earth. Not because of the conditions in the United States or any other country a now or in the future, but so it will be the end of sin and death and all of the results of the fall of man in the Garden of Eden.

Yes, but for now I have to live here, as do my kids and my grand kids.
Paul told us to pray for all those in authority for what reasons??? (note v2)

1Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men,
2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence.
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,

SO this should also be your concern today even as it was 2000 years ago.
God hears our prayers because this here is according to His will, and if we ask anything according to His will, we know that He HEARS us, and then we have whatever we asked of Him.

 

[church mouse guy]

Harris was an anchor baby....

 

[Calminian]

The people telling this nonsense lost this argument over President Obama and they will lose this one, too. Seriously, if you want to re-elect President Trump, then concentrate on the policy issues. If Biden-Harris win, then Senator Harris will become the next vice-president of the United States. Period.

I don't like that it's come up, but it's wrong to compare it to Obama (or Ted Cruz or McCain). Obama would have been a natural born citizen even if he was born overseas, since his mother was a citizen (and it's unlikely his mother was air traveling back in 1960, anyway). Cruz and McCain also had US parents.

We need to understand also, that Obama and the democrats drew out the story because they believed it helped them (and it probably did). I'm thankful Trump put an end to it, forcing him to finally show his certificate. That was his primary goal. Show the certificate and be done with it. Like him or not, it worked. Only he was able to force that issue.

BTW, that likely incited the hatred that lead to spy-gate.

I believe Eastman is right, Harris has a problem with both parents being foreign citizens. I suppose it depends if anchor babies are considered natural born. I don't know what the courts have determined, or if it's still undetermined. Eastman's a smart guy. He wouldn't have brought this up, if it was not a legit issue.

And I am sick of people telling us what we can and can't discuss. This is not a taboo issue. Our founders put these rules in place for good reason.

 

[Calminian]

The United States Supreme Court determined it way back in 1898 - see my post #3 above. Some people may not like the way it was settled but I seriously doubt it would be overturned in 2020. Although it might be interesting if someone who really thinks that Senator Harris is not eligible would file a court case. How about you, Calminian?

Like I said, I'm not informed about this. It would seem Eastman and others are not convinced this is completely settled by whatever happened in 1898. In fact, it's come up recently with the anchor baby issue in 2016. Many think Trump can in fact do away with it.

 

[Calminian]

Then let them put up by filing a court case immediately, or shut up.

I didn't say you were wrong, just that some very good minds disagree about that ruling establishes. I'm certainly willing to listen as they bring their arguments. Eastman did put up his argument.

 

[Calminian]

If they don’t have the guts to file a court case.....

So unless you file a court case, you can't have an opinion? I'm afraid that's not how freedom works.

For me, it's an open question. I don't care if someone's offended that I'm listening to Eastman and others.

 

[KenH]

So unless you file a court case, you can't have an opinion?

I withdraw the post.

 

[Calminian]

I withdraw the post.

You're free either way. I'm not saying the info wasn't helpful.