Kamala not eligible!

In January 2019, Democrat hopeful Kamala Harris announced her candidacy to be President of the United States. But, there's one glaring problem. Kamala Harris is not legally eligible to be President or Vice President.

[Edit 2020-08-12 ] In August of 2020, Joe Biden announced Kamala Harris as his pick for Vice President. Once again, this issue becomes relevant.

Legal Standards

The U.S. Constitution says that "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 Constitution was later amended to extend this requirement to the Vice President.

All persons who were citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution are long dead. Only the "natural born citizen" qualification remains in practical effect.

The key question is whether Kamala Harris is a "natural born citizen" of the United States. According to the clearly written definition, which has been acknowledged for over two centuries, if one of her parents was not a US Citizen at the time of her birth, she is not a natural born citizen.

When one examines the definition of the term and the purpose for including it in the Constitution, this becomes clear.

The Definition

"The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover the meaning of those who made it." --James Wilson, Of the Study of Law in the United States, 1790

What is the source of the term, "natural born citizen"? It is defined in the internationally published reference book, "Law of Nations", penned by Emmerich de Vattel in 1758. The definition states:
 
"The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." - Law of Nations
 
This is the one and only definition of the term, understood in international and US law, that existed when the Constitution was crafted. Its meaning has remained consistent for centuries as recognized by US law.

"This 1758 work by Swiss legal philosopher Emmerich de Vattel is of special importance to scholars of constitutional history and law, for it was read by many of the Founders of the United States of America, and informed their understanding of the principles of law which became established in the Constitution of 1787." - Constitution Society regarding "Law of Nations"

Did The Framers Rely Upon Law of Nations?

The historical record shows that "Law of Nations" was a primary reference used to craft the US Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. In 1775, as the Founders determined to create their own nation from scratch, Benjamin Franklin received three copies of the original French edition from the editor Dumas for use by the Continental Congress.

"I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the Law of Nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress..." - Benjamin Franklin’s letter to Charles W.F. Dumas, December 1775

"Law of Nations" was in use by many other nations as well, printed in several languages including French, English and German, to ensure heads of state understood principles and language to be used in international relations. It is still in print today as a reference book and is still used by the Supreme Court in Constitutional rulings.

By 1780, "Law of Nations" was a standard textbook in American universities. By 1787, it was well understood by the Framers of the Constitution and the nation as a whole. There was no need to debate the meaning of "natural born citizen" as the Framers crafted the Constitution. It was a commonly understood term.

Law of Nations is the only reference book named in the Constitution itself, empowering the Federal Government to enforce its clauses:

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations; - US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8

Kamala Harris Is Not A Natural Born Citizen

Kamala Harris was born October 20, 1964, in Oakland, California. Her mother was a Tamil Indian, her father a Jamaican. Both were immigrants who had not naturalized, thus were not citizens, when Kamala was born.

Obama wasn't natural born either. Natural born was to prevent foreign countries from having their operative elected here. Yet here we are with card carrying commies in the highest offices.

Kamala Harris Is Not Eligible To Be President or Vice President - Not a Natural Born Citizen
 
Last edited:
I care. But under current law you just have to be dumped born in the USA to be eligible to be the President. There is a whole industry dedicated to getting foreigners into the US to birth anchor babies. I want that changed. Team Dazzler and Kameltoe don't.
In the larger electorate NOC.
Zero votes to be swayed toward Trump chasing these pipe dreams prior to the election.
All it does is give @HHusky an excuse to shit his straw men all over a thread.
 
Nice. But that isn't what the Courts have ruled. And they won't. Probably take an amendment and there is no way it would get through the Congress let alone 3/4 of the states.
 
Nice. But that isn't what the Courts have ruled. And they won't. Probably take an amendment and there is no way it would get through the Congress let alone 3/4 of the states.
What rulings?

United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
169 U.S. 649 (1898)

Wong-Kim-Ark.png


icon-save-arrow.svg

Share
“[T]he Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens . . . ”
 Justice Horace Gray (Majority)
 
Nice. But that isn't what the Courts have ruled. And they won't. Probably take an amendment and there is no way it would get through the Congress let alone 3/4 of the states.
What rulings?

169 U.S. 649 (1898)

Wong-Kim-Ark.png


icon-save-arrow.svg

 Justice Horace Gray (Majority)
Regular citizenship not the same. But since they cheated Barry in were done. Anyone can be president.
Regular citizenship isn't the issue. You can't be President if you aren't born in the USA or if you don't have a US citizen as a parent. As I said, current law says Harris is eligible to be President. You would need a Supreme Court decision overturning or qualifying Ark or a Constitutional Amendment to get there. Stop digging.
 
Nice. But that isn't what the Courts have ruled. And they won't. Probably take an amendment and there is no way it would get through the Congress let alone 3/4 of the states.
What rulings?

169 U.S. 649 (1898)

Wong-Kim-Ark.png


icon-save-arrow.svg

 Justice Horace Gray (Majority)
Regular citizenship not the same. But since they cheated Barry in were done. Anyone can be president.
You're embarrassing the other cultists.
 
You're embarrassing the other cultists.

No dummy, we Trump/USA supporters can disagree on these type of things precisely because we aren’t in a cult that demands complete conformity to the cause.
OTOH, get three of you Dem cultists converging in a thread and it’s a pathetic display of mutual affirmation for and from each other in some weird internet circlejerk ritual. It’s fucking bizarre, Bethany.
 
I'm actually showing what an honest person does to explain a subject to another honest person. You have never explained anything to anyone that I can recall. Just lies and evasion. Thank god that NATO is "tightened" up and the world is now safer than when your dementia patient was elected selected Mr. Hands Up Don't Shoot.
 
I'm actually showing what an honest person does to explain a subject to another honest person. You have never explained anything to anyone that I can recall. Just lies and evasion. Thank god that NATO is "tightened" up and the world is now safer than when your dementia patient was elected selected Mr. Hands Up Don't Shoot.
Exactly
 
I'll stick to natural born. I mean what reason would the founders, who just fought the King for their freedom, to not think it was OK for the king to bang women send them to America to have the kids in America and then run those children for president. They'd be all for that.
 
I'll stick to natural born. I mean what reason would the founders, who just fought the King for their freedom, to not think it was OK for the king to bang women send them to America to have the kids in America and then run those children for president. They'd be all for that.
I think you are correct. But it will take a Supreme Court decision to overturn Ark and they won't touch it. I never defended the policy which is ridiculous. Team Dazzler is supports open borders not me.
 
When is Kamala going to announce paying reparations for slavery?

And as a descendent of slave traders, she’ll write the first check.
 
You're embarrassing the other cultists.

No dummy, we Trump/USA supporters can disagree on these type of things precisely because we aren’t in a cult that demands complete conformity to the cause.
OTOH, get three of you Dem cultists converging in a thread and it’s a pathetic display of mutual affirmation for and from each other in some weird internet circlejerk ritual. It’s fucking bizarre, Bethany.
Trump supporters: we don’t demand complete conformity.
Also Trump supporters: anyone who is a Republican and doesn’t support Trump is a RINO.
 
You're embarrassing the other cultists.

No dummy, we Trump/USA supporters can disagree on these type of things precisely because we aren’t in a cult that demands complete conformity to the cause.
OTOH, get three of you Dem cultists converging in a thread and it’s a pathetic display of mutual affirmation for and from each other in some weird internet circlejerk ritual. It’s fucking bizarre, Bethany.
Trump supporters: we don’t demand complete conformity.
Also Trump supporters: anyone who is a Republican and doesn’t support Trump is a RINO.
Pathetic
 
You're embarrassing the other cultists.

No dummy, we Trump/USA supporters can disagree on these type of things precisely because we aren’t in a cult that demands complete conformity to the cause.
OTOH, get three of you Dem cultists converging in a thread and it’s a pathetic display of mutual affirmation for and from each other in some weird internet circlejerk ritual. It’s fucking bizarre, Bethany.
Trump supporters: we don’t demand complete conformity.
Also Trump supporters: anyone who is a Republican and doesn’t support Trump is a RINO.
Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive, dummy. Also, my post was specifically addressing posters who support Trump on this board having disagreements and in part how YOU have not once called out anyone on your dumb little squad here. You need their approval.
You’re very stupid. Write another letter to the newspaper, Weirdo.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top