Is Kamala Harris eligible to be President?

Diana West asked that question on Twitter today, and given Harris’ life circumstances, it’s a fair one.

There were a lot of questions regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility both before he ran and after he was elected, but at least one of his parents was a U.S. citizen, and born in the United States.

Not true of Kamala Harris. Both of her parents were born in foreign countries – India and Jamaica – and neither could possibly have been citizens at the time of her birth because they had not resided in this country long enough to apply for naturalization. Although Harris is a citizen because she was born in this country under current interpretation of the 14th amendment, neither of her parents were citizens at the time.

Harris’ mother arrived in the USA from India in 1960, according to her obituary, and her father arrived in the United States in 1961, according to his biography. Kamala Harris was born in 1964 in Oakland, California. To become a naturalized citizen, you must be a permanent resident (green card holder) for five years before you can apply for citizenship. If public biographical information is correct, neither of her parents met that standard.

Of course, all of this rests on the definition of the term “natural born citizen”, which is, and has been, a point of contention for many years, since it is not defined in the Constitution or anywhere else in Federal law.

Ms Harris spent important formative years living in Canada – not the United States. She lived in Quebec from the age of 12 until she left to attend college in the USA in 1981.

I’m sure each of us has an opinion (not that anyone in politics cares what we think.) Is Kamala Harris legally eligible to be President of the United States?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 2020 Presidential Race, Constitution, Law, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Is Kamala Harris eligible to be President?

  1. stella says:

    Also a liar.

    Liked by 6 people

    • auscitizenmom says:

      I think we already knew that, but this is sure a blatant one. 🙄

      Liked by 2 people

    • jeans2nd says:

      “She lived in Quebec from the age of 12…”
      The GP article says she moved to Canada with her mother at age 7.
      Her paternal ancestors were also slave-holders.
      But none of this matters. The PTB (currently Obama imo) want Harris in, and if you disagree with anything she says or does you are a phobicisticphobophobe so shut up and obey.

      Wait till the Gen Zers get ahold of these people. My Gen Zers are gonna make mincemeat out of these SJWs. And will enjoy every minute of it.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. auscitizenmom says:

    NO!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. glendl says:

    I will begin with some background information.
    0bama was the first one to raise the citizenship issue with the details surrounding McCain’s birth. Both McCain’s parents were US citizens and McCain was born in a US Naval clinic/hospital in Panama Canal Zone. Keep in mind the Panama Canal Zone was under US control until 1999.

    Hillary’s team found the circumstances of 0bama’s birth and proceeded to keep quiet about it. I suppose she didn’t want to be accused of racism and dividing the Democrat party. My first suspicion came when she conceded before the DNC when she had a good case to be made for the nomination. In July, before the DNC, Philip Berg filed suit against 0bama and the DNC because of his citizenship status. Berg was a big name Democrat from Pennsylvania.

    In 2016, I did not consider Cruz, Jindal, or Rubio Constitutionally eligible to be President. No question was raised by anyone. Which was my fear all along. The powers-that-be would use the 0bama presidency as a precedent.

    I do not consider Harris as being Constitutionally eligible to be President. I am sure it is racist or xenophobic or sexist to place any restrictions on a person’s right to be President of the United States.

    I will follow with my thoughts on 0bama’s candidacy. It has to be thoughts since no one was interested in establishing any facts. I will say I was a birther before being birther was cool. I do know that if I was to seek employment again, I would have to prove my eligibility to work in the US. One of the documents necessary would be a birth certificate issued in the US. There are no exceptions to that law. I was employed in the 1990s when the law was passed and had to provide proof then and since then.

    WordPress.com / Gravatar.com credentials can be used.
    This may or may not have been submitted,

    Liked by 3 people

  4. glendl says:

    I believe 0bama was born in Kenya to an underage US citizen and a foreign national. More than likely, 0bama could have been a US citizen if his mother had registered his birth in Hawaii when she returned home. I doubt it happened because she hated the USA as did her parents and the 0bama side did too. Since that form was not filled out, I consider 0bama to be an Illegal Alien. Had the form been filled out, it would be proof that he is not a Natural Born Citizen because that is not dependent upon a law.
    I do not believe 0bama has a birth certificate because Moslems do not like birth certificates, you can get by with that in Kenya, but not America.
    Also, why would someone spend over $4 million dollars to keep from showing his birth certificate in court, only to offer it up online? Maybe, because a judge would have a document expert look at it? What is he hiding? As I said, the burden of proof is on 0bama, not me. Some lib idiot babbled something about libel and or slander on my part. I said, let 0bama prove I am lying.

    I have never wanted to see 0bama’s birth certificate because I do not believe he has one. I have wanted to see his Selective Service Registration and the passport he used for his 1980s world tour. If he used anything other than a US passport, he is a citizen of that country. Had he been a US citizen, he would have lost his US citizenship.

    I am out of time, but I am going to attempt to post a link to a 93-page document explaining Natural Born Citizen. The conclusion is that 0bama is not a Natural Born Citizen I said attempt because last time I looked it was there, however it did disappear from the internet for at least 2 years. However, I had made a hard copy when I first saw it.

    Liked by 4 people

    • JTR says:

      I believe she’s just Obama in a wig!
      And like him, her voice grates on my nerves.

      Liked by 2 people

    • stella says:

      I don’t believe there is any legal definition of natural born citizen. There are many opinions on the subject, and I’ll bet I’ve seen most of them already.

      Liked by 1 person

      • glendl says:

        To a certain extent, I think 0bama people discreetly pushed the birth certificate issue to keep the focus off his father. The main concern at the time the Constitution was written was the citizenship of the father. 0bama’s father was not a US Citizen. There was a law passed and then repealed in the early years of the United States. There never was a real need for that legal definition because of the integrity of previous candidates and officials. When 0bama came along, they were afraid to make a ruling. Now we can see the likes of Harris or even some Illegal Alien as our President.

        Liked by 2 people

        • stella says:

          The citizenship of the father was a matter of British common law, not the law in the United States. If you assume that natural born citizen is the meaning in our Constitution as it is in British common law, then you can come to the conclusion that you (and others) have reached. It is an opinion, and nothing more. There is nothing in our Constitution or in U.S. law that defines what natural born citizen means in the USA.

          Like

          • glendl says:

            But there is a pattern of behaviors or expectations that were followed until 0bama. Even 0bama went after McCain. Why, there is something there.

            In 1988 there was an issue of Romney eligibility, and he was ruled eligible. I will find it.

            Like

            • stella says:

              I don’t mean to be rude, but the issue of Obama’s eligibility is dead. I know about Romney.

              Like

              • glendl says:

                No, the issue is there, if it wasn’t why is the same question being applied to Harris. At least applied in your post since I haven’t seen it elsewhere. By elsewhere, I am referring to the media, the watchdogs of the public welfare.

                Like

                • stella says:

                  The point I am trying to make is that we all have opinions about it, but the subject needs to be settled legally once and for all.

                  Like

                  • glendl says:

                    I believe it has been settled but for some reason, it is not being acted upon.

                    I referenced an early law that identified a natural born citizen and a not too distant law removed the words, natural born. By the Naturalization Act of 1790, children born outside the United States, of citizens, were to be ‘considered as natural born citizens’ This act was superseded by the Naturalization Act of 1795, by which the phrase ‘natural born was removed’.
                    It is thought that the term was redundant if the parents are citizens, the child is a citizen and eligible to be president. What else would that child be but natural born? You are either eligible to be president at birth or you are not, age and residency requirements have not come into play at that point. If you are made a citizen by statute, then you are not a natural born citizen.

                    Like

                  • stella says:

                    The Naturalization Act of 1790 was repealed and replaced by the Act of 1795.

                    The most common interpretation is a person who does not need to go through naturalization in order to be a citizen of the United States.

                    Like

          • glendl says:

            British Common Law was the basis of the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. The American Revolution was brought about in part by the colonists seeking their rights as Englishmen. Primarily, “No Taxation Without Representation”. The Constitution enshrined some of that common-law and modified some. Statute changed more aspects of common-law.

            In the case of The Venus 12 US 253, 289 (1814) Chief Justice Marshall stated:
            “Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says, “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. …”

            Chief Justice Marshall relied upon a pre-1797 edition of Vattel’s text. The 1797 translation was adopted by the Supreme Court in Minor v Happersett, 88 US 162 (1874) where Chief Justice Waite stated:
            “The Constitution does not, in words say who shall be a natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of their parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were the natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. …”

            We are either a Constitutional Republic and a Nation of Laws or we will be ruled by the Cult of Personality. Past law breaking does not excuse present or future law breaking.

            Like

            • glendl says:

              I attempted to type everything exactly as it was in print in front of me. Hence, spellings, punctuation, verbiage,

              Like

            • stella says:

              And our country needs to clarify this question. We can talk and bloviate all we want about it, but the issue needs to settled legally.

              Liked by 1 person

            • charles says:

              British common law had nothing do with the writing of the Declaration of Independence , US Constitution or the Bill of Rights The Revolutionary War was fought to free the colonists from the king of England and British Common law ! The US Constitution ,Declaration of Independence and Bill Of Rights is based on Emer De Vettel’s Law of Nations !

              Like

    • glendl says:

      John Greschak – What is a Natural Born Citizen of the …
      http://www.fototime.com/ftweb/bin/ft.dll/picture?PictId={ED7DC1F9-E939-4B3E-8C59-ACBFB1B335E5…
      What is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States? by John Greschak john@greschak.com Published: December 2, 2008 Updated: January 12, 2010 (10:04 pm EST) For a synopsis of this essay, see Synopsis .
      John Greschak’s Essay-What is a Natural Born Citizen of U
      http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/goatsledge/20090129 Greschak Essay What Is NBC.pdf
      John Greschak’s Essay-What is a Natural Born Citizen of U.S. by Mountain Publius Goat on Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:55 am John Greschak’s Essay-What is a Natural Born Citizen of U.S. Here is an excellent essay written by John Gerschak about what is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States.

      I erred, there are only 85 pages.

      Like

  5. MaryfromMarin says:

    I wish our Constitution had an Idiot Clause. As in, disqualifying certain persons from seeking public office.

    I know, stupid–but I can dream, can’t I?

    Liked by 3 people

    • glendl says:

      One must always dream. You are most definitely Not Stupid.
      Al Capone is supposed to have said, “If you have a gun, a smile and a plan and you need to give up one of those three things, give up the gun. If you must give up a second thing, give up the smile, but never give up the plan (dream).

      Like

    • glendl says:

      I just had another thought. While you meant the idiots as being the candidates, well you are right. But, only a bigger Idiot would vote for an Idiot. What kind of people have sent Pelosi, Waters, Schumer, etc to Congress for decades?

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.