John McCain ineligible to be President because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone?

[motivez]

So maybe some of you have seen the new stuff floating around about McCain being born in the Panama Canal Zone, but maybe not

If not, here's the summary of the argument being made:

“No person except a natural born citizen,

shall be eligible to the office of President”

John McCain was born August 29, 1936 in Panama

by Francis Steffan

John McCain was born August 29, 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone, to two U.S. citizens. It’s a common misunderstanding that the zone was a U.S. territory - in fact, the U.S. had lease rights, but not territorial rights.

The US Constitution states, “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” - “is where ONLY the natural act of one being born in a place determines the status of ones citizenship with no additional stipulations necessary to influence that status”

No law or court ruling has ever established the precise definition of a natural born citizen. It is generally agreed that a natural born citizen of the United States is any person born in one of the 50 states or the District of Columbia.

John McCain’s father “Jack” was born in Council Bluffs, Iowa. McCain graduated from the United States Naval Academy in 1931. Like his father and son, he graduated near the bottom of his class. He married Roberta Wright, a wealthy oil heiress, on January 21, 1933, in Caesar’s Bar, Tijuana, Mexico. During WW II he commanded the submarine Gunnel at Operation Torch. After the end of the war, he was assigned to the Office of the Chief of Naval Personnel until 1948. He assumed command of Submarine Division 71 in the Pacific the next year. In 1950, he was assigned to a series of posts at The Pentagon. He spent the 1960s in a series of commands in the Atlantic, becoming Commander in Chief, U.S. Naval Forces in Europe in 1967 and 1968. Admiral McCain directed an investigation into the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty and he wanted the investigation done in less than a week even though the court’s president, Rear Admiral Isaac Kidd, said that it would take 6 months to conduct properly. Admiral McCain also wouldn’t permit Admiral Kidd to travel to Israel or to contact any potential Israeli witnesses. In fact, the written affidavits of 60 witnesses from the Liberty itself who were hospitalized at the time of the restricted inquiry, were also excluded from the final report and not considered as part of the evidentiary record. The investigation was completed in just ten days. The National Archives in College Park, Marylandincludes in its files on casualties from the Liberty copies of the original telegrams the Navy sent out to family members. The telegramswhich called the attack accidental,were sent out June 9, the day before the Navy court of inquiry convened .

When Senator McCain was asked to reopen and conduct a proper investigation into the USS Liberty’s attack he stated that he wasn’t going to do anything about it because the “matter was thoroughly reviewed.”

Senator McCain also collaborated with ultra liberal Senator Ted Kennedy to attempt to provide amnesty to nearly 40 million illegal aliens, mostly Mexican.

When the Constitution was established, the United States government did not have a empire builder foreign policy. The United States military was for defensive purposes only. As a matter of fact, the U.S. is not to have a “standing Army” and all the documents evidencing the intent of the authors of the Constitution, warned against becoming involved in foreign entanglements. The U.S. had zero foreign based military forces and certainly did not approve of, envision, or condone having babies and raising families on foreign based U.S. military installations. The intent of the authors of the Constitution is exactly opposite the policy twentieth century U.S. government has pursued.

The Constitution of the United States, Article 1, Section 8, vests in Congress the power “to establish an uniform rule of naturalization.” “Naturalization” is NOT synonymous with “Natural Born Citizen.”

In order to come to a Constitutional definition of “Natural Born Citizen,” one must look to the common meaning and understanding of the phrase at the time it was written.
The Constitution has been called a “living document” by liberal progressives who think they know better than the authors of the Constitution and want what they want with disregard for The Supreme Law of the Land. In one way, and one way only, is the Constitution a living document. The authors of the Constitution gave a specific process to add to or subtract from the Constitution and that is by amendment. The Supreme Court, the U.S.Congress nor the President of the United States are granted the authority to define or change the Constitution in any way, they only have an obligation and duty to obey it.

There were no foreign based US military forces at the writing of the U.S. Constitution, therefore, it is impossible that the intent of the Constitution was to have babies born to civilian wives of military personnel be considered “Natural Born Citizens.” The only authority the government may lawfully exercise, through the U.S.Congress, is to declare these children to be “naturalized Citizens” at birth based upon the U.S. , Congress’s authority“establish an uniform rule of Naturalization.” I must reiterate, not the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court nor the President of the United States is “authorized” to define or change the meaning, definition, or intent of “Natural Born Citizen” as prescribed by the authors of the Constitution.

The original “intent” and therefore meaning and definition of “Natural Born Citizen” is one free white man being delivered through natural progression of a pregnancy, born within the geographical boundaries of one of the several States of the union, and later the District of Columbia. This is very clear and simple and what it means is born HERE.
In the Fourteenth Amendment the eligible group allowed Citizenship was expanded from free white men to “All persons.” This would have been better stated “all people” to avoid the bogus recognition of a corporation being a “person.”This would have been better as it would have clarified the meaning as intended which is having rights of people but lacking any of the liabilities. One cannot imprison a corporation, but that is for a later article.

The Fourteenth Amendment,Section 1 actually defines “natural born citizen” by stating, “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.”
One’s wishes of what one feels things should be must yield to facts of law and one must accept the way things are according to the law until such time one is able to change the law.

There are two types of Citizenship in the United States, Natural Born and Naturalized. The fourteenth amendment defines “Natural Born Citizen” as persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It goes on to explain that there exists a dual Citizenship that includes the United States and of the State in which on lives. This in itself serves to demonstrate that Natural Born Citizen being born in the United States means within one of the several united States of America.

People may feel that it is not right that John McCain is not eligible to be President of the United States of America, however, this is a fact of law. “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. There are two types of Citizenship in the United States “Natural Born” and “Naturalized.”Congress has authority to makerules as to how to become a “naturalized citizen.” There is no such authority granted to Congress, the Court, or the President to define “Natural Born Citizen.”

Given the fact the United States official and long term military enclaves presence within foreign nations was not authorized and in fact was cautioned against by the authors of the founding documents of this nation including but not limited to the Constitution it is not only unlikely but impossible that the authors intended anyone born outside the several States of the United States, for any reason, to be considered “Natural Born Citizens” of the United States. This position and fact is second witnessed and verified by the fourteenth amendment, section 1 where it states clearly the two forms of United States Citizenship and defines Natural Born Citizen as “all persons born…in the United States…”.

Some will attempt to argue the point that U.S. military bases are under the jurisdiction of the United States and the fourteenth amendment mentions that. The fourteenth amendment states, “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.” The word “and” means “as well as” being born in the United States. Being born only under the jurisdiction of the United States, as some misguided military people would like to imagine, is not good enough. Some would like to believe that because the “United States” has a Status of Forces Agreement with a foreign government that military bases are somehow “sovereign” U.S. territory. If you murder a Panamanian citizen in Oregon you will be arrested by Oregon police, go through the Oregon courts and be imprisoned in Oregon, and now some other state maybe, but still within the U.S. If you murder a Panamanian citizen on a U.S. military base in Panama you will be arrested by Panamanian police, go through the Panamanian courts and be imprisoned in Panama. So much for “sovereignty.”

All this discussion is nothing more than hot air and a waste of time that is off point. The point is that one cannot build a viable position on a non-existent foundation. In this case the foundation is the Constitution and the intent of the authors, NOT Status of Forces Agreements and worthless arguments by military men who would like to have babies on foreign soil, calling them natural born Citizens and have them run for President some day.

The authors of the U.S. founding documents counseled against becoming entangled in foreign wars. They also had a distinct distaste for colonial empire building. So now we are to believe that it was their intent to designate the prodigy, born on foreign soil, of the American centurion colonizing for the empire as a Natural Born Citizen?

The fourteenth amendment states “born or naturalized in the United States,” that is IN the United States. At the time of the writing of the Constitution it was properly written as united States of America as the word “united” was describing the condition of the States not a proper name of a thing. The Congress can direct that persons may be “Naturalized” “in” the United States to mean embassies, military bases or wherever else they decide. That is what they are authorized to do. However, they are NOT authorized to redefine what “Natural Born Citizen” means. It means what it meant to the authors of the Constitution. The US did not have foreign military bases at the time the Constitution was authored. Therefore “born on a US military base in a foreign country” is NOT what they meant by “Natural Born Citizen.”

The intention of the authors of the Constitution was that no person born outside the geographical boundaries of the several States of the United States of America be eligible to hold the office of President of the United States of America. Animus ad se omne jus ducit - It is to the intention that all law applies. Animus moninis est anima scripti - The intention of the party is the soul of the instrument. 3 Bulstr67 - Maxims of Law from Bouvier’s 1856 Law Dictionary.

There are consequences to disregarding the Constitution and the intent of the authors of our founding documents. There are consequences to following a course of empire building by military might. There are consequences to being born on foreign soil as a son or daughter of a centurion of that empire building military. You are not Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States of America.

You may think it’s not fair. You may feel it’s not right. You may think because military and government “experts” tell you a military base in a foreign country is actually the United States that it’s okay for John McCain to hold the office of President of the United States. You are nevertheless wrong and so are they, no matter how long they have told the falsehood and believed in error. communis error no facit just - A common error does not make law. -Maxims of Law from Bouvier’s 1856 Law Dictionary.

The position stated in this article is based only upon the Constitution and the intent of the authors of the founding documents of this nation. The only authority on this matter is the Constitution and the intent of the authors. Argumentum ab authoritate est fortissimum in lege - An argument drawn from authority is the strongest in law. Co. Litt. 254.-Maxims of Law from Bouvier’s 1856 Law Dictionary.

If you don’t like the law, by all means work to change it, however, until such time that it is changed John McCain III is not a natural born citizen and therefore not eligible to be President of the United States of America.

American Voice Newspaper / Website / Radio Network

Emphasis theirs.

I'm not sure whether or not this is a silly argument. I personally think if someone is born to two US citizens, it shouldn't matter where they are born, they should inherit the citizenship of their parents automatically.

Likewise, someone born in this country to two people who are not citizens, whether here legally through some type of visa or are here illegally, shouldn't automatically be granted citizenship.

But if that last one applies, and the constitutional case being made here is accurate, it should certainly apply to people like John McCain as well.

There are also arguments about whether or not someone should even have to be born here to be President so long as they've decided to live their lives in the US, and I'm not sure how I feel about that.

Anyway, thoughts?

[A_C_E]

The Naturalization Act of 1790 states that someone "born of two United States citizens, even on foreign soil, is to be considered a Natural Born Citizen."

That should settle this, methinks

[thewise1]

This reminds me of the King of the Hill where Hank discovers he was born in New York, for some reason.

Anyway, I don't want McCain for president, but this attempt at a loophole to keep him out is stupid.

[hsmith]

NYT

WASHINGTON — The question has nagged at the parents of Americans born outside the continental United States for generations: Dare their children aspire to grow up and become president? In the case of Senator John McCain of Arizona, the issue is becoming more than a matter of parental daydreaming.

Mr. McCain’s likely nomination as the Republican candidate for president and the happenstance of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the nation’s highest office.

Almost since those words were written in 1787 with scant explanation, their precise meaning has been the stuff of confusion, law school review articles, whisper campaigns and civics class debates over whether only those delivered on American soil can be truly natural born. To date, no American to take the presidential oath has had an official birthplace outside the 50 states.

“There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent,” said Sarah H. Duggin, an associate professor of law at Catholic University who has studied the issue extensively. “It is not a slam-dunk situation.”

Mr. McCain was born on a military installation in the Canal Zone, where his mother and father, a Navy officer, were stationed. His campaign advisers say they are comfortable that Mr. McCain meets the requirement and note that the question was researched for his first presidential bid in 1999 and reviewed again this time around.

But given mounting interest, the campaign recently asked Theodore B. Olson, a former solicitor general now advising Mr. McCain, to prepare a detailed legal analysis. “I don’t have much doubt about it,” said Mr. Olson, who added, though, that he still needed to finish his research.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and one of Mr. McCain’s closest allies, said it would be incomprehensible to him if the son of a military member born in a military station could not run for president.

“He was posted there on orders from the United States government,” Mr. Graham said of Mr. McCain’s father. “If that becomes a problem, we need to tell every military family that your kid can’t be president if they take an overseas assignment.”

The phrase “natural born” was in early drafts of the Constitution. Scholars say notes of the Constitutional Convention give away little of the intent of the framers. Its origin may be traced to a letter from John Jay to George Washington, with Jay suggesting that to prevent foreigners from becoming commander in chief, the Constitution needed to “declare expressly” that only a natural-born citizen could be president.

Ms. Duggin and others who have explored the arcane subject in depth say legal argument and basic fairness may indeed be on the side of Mr. McCain, a longtime member of Congress from Arizona. But multiple experts and scholarly reviews say the issue has never been definitively resolved by either Congress or the Supreme Court.

Ms. Duggin favors a constitutional amendment to settle the matter. Others have called on Congress to guarantee that Americans born outside the national boundaries can legitimately see themselves as potential contenders for the Oval Office.

“They ought to have the same rights,” said Don Nickles, a former Republican senator from Oklahoma who in 2004 introduced legislation that would have established that children born abroad to American citizens could harbor presidential ambitions without a legal cloud over their hopes. “There is some ambiguity because there has never been a court case on what ‘natural-born citizen’ means.”

Mr. McCain’s situation is different from those of the current governors of California and Michigan, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer M. Granholm, who were born in other countries and were first citizens of those nations, rendering them naturalized Americans ineligible under current interpretations. The conflict that could conceivably ensnare Mr. McCain goes more to the interpretation of “natural born” when weighed against intent and decades of immigration law.

Mr. McCain is not the first person to find himself in these circumstances. The last Arizona Republican to be a presidential nominee, Barry Goldwater, faced the issue. He was born in the Arizona territory in 1909, three years before it became a state. But Goldwater did not win, and the view at the time was that since he was born in a continental territory that later became a state, he probably met the standard.

It also surfaced in the 1968 candidacy of George Romney, who was born in Mexico, but again was not tested. The former Connecticut politician Lowell P. Weicker Jr., born in Paris, sought a legal analysis when considering the presidency, an aide said, and was assured he was eligible. Franklin D. Roosevelt Jr. was once viewed as a potential successor to his father, but was seen by some as ineligible since he had been born on Campobello Island in Canada. The 21st president, Chester A. Arthur, whose birthplace is Vermont, was rumored to have actually been born in Canada, prompting some to question his eligibility.

Quickly recognizing confusion over the evolving nature of citizenship, the First Congress in 1790 passed a measure that did define children of citizens “born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States to be natural born.” But that law is still seen as potentially unconstitutional and was overtaken by subsequent legislation that omitted the “natural-born” phrase.

Mr. McCain’s citizenship was established by statutes covering the offspring of Americans abroad and laws specific to the Canal Zone as Congress realized that Americans would be living and working in the area for extended periods. But whether he qualifies as natural-born has been a topic of Internet buzz for months, with some declaring him ineligible while others assert that he meets all the basic constitutional qualifications — a natural-born citizen at least 35 years of age with 14 years of residence.

“I don’t think he has any problem whatsoever,” said Mr. Nickles, a McCain supporter. “But I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if somebody is going to try to make an issue out of it. If it goes to court, I think he will win.”

Lawyers who have examined the topic say there is not just confusion about the provision itself, but uncertainty about who would have the legal standing to challenge a candidate on such grounds, what form a challenge could take and whether it would have to wait until after the election or could be made at any time.

In a paper written 20 years ago for the Yale Law Journal on the natural-born enigma, Jill Pryor, now a lawyer in Atlanta, said that any legal challenge to a presidential candidate born outside national boundaries would be “unpredictable and unsatisfactory.”

“If I were on the Supreme Court, I would decide for John McCain,” Ms. Pryor said in a recent interview. “But it is certainly not a frivolous issue.”

I am sure people will say "it isn't a big deal" but in fact, it is. The Constitution specifically states who and who is not allowed to be President. The argument might fall under "is a military base a part of the US," but does that pass constitutional muster.

And big deal about the sob story "you want to tell service men that if their child is born abroad they can't become President?" Sorry, thats part of the deal. Sure, pass an amendment to deal with the issue, but we can't just overlook it.

[Ardentfrost]

I always thought a military base was considered US soil

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

I always thought a military base was considered US soil

i guess it comes down to what "is" and "isn't" US soil.

Is the UN Property really not "US" soil even though it is within our borders?

[Phantom]

It seems to me natural born would mean citizenship from birth and have nothing to do with location of that birth.

If, as I assume, McCain was a U.S. citizen from birth, I would think this meets the spirit of the provision and doesn't conflict with the language

[7960]

There are natural born citizens and naturalized citizens.

He was never naturalized.

Ergo (word of the day), if what you're saying is true, then McCain is not a citizen.

Correct?

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by 7960

There are natural born citizens and naturalized citizens.

He was never naturalized.

Ergo (word of the day), if what you're saying is true, then McCain is not a citizen.

Correct?

does this mean McCain is an illegal immigrant?

(the answer of course is no - since natural born has never been defined, one cannot say natural born and naturalized are the exclusive paths to citizenship, or even that natural born and naturalized are mutually exclusive)

[7960]

now for the moment you've all been waiting for, the answer:

Constitutional Topic: Citizenship - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Originally Posted by the constitution and laws

Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "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." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

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.

[WickedLou9]

what a silly debate. of course the guy is a citizen. Military bases ARE us soil according to the law.

[JaJae]

The NY Times really has it out for him lately. We've had this debate in the past.

[WickedLou9]

The NYT is turning into the National Enquirer

[nbiggershaft]

, and retarded, he's qualified by being born to american parents and because it is considered legally us soil

[firecracker]

Wishful thinking. It just goes to show how much McCain is hated by so many people, that everyone is looking for a way to have him disqualified

[Linzyhop]

Originally Posted by firecracker

Wishful thinking. It just goes to show how much McCain is hated by so many people, that everyone is looking for a way to have him disqualified

hated? um. not at all. i doubt anyone would say mccain is hated. it just how politics in general goes. one side says something stupid, the other side comes back with something stupid. if there was anyone that i would say is widely hated in the election right now, that would be hillary.