Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States' Constitution.
Advertisement
by Western Vale Confederacy » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:26 am
by Salandriagado » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:30 am
by The Alma Mater » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:32 am
by Western Vale Confederacy » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:36 am
by Vassenor » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:36 am
Salandriagado wrote:Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
He meant that one of the required conditions to become President is to have been born in the United States or to have two American citizens as parents.
Or to have been an American citizen in 1789, though that one hasn't come up for a while.
And maybe also all of the other categories under §1401, who are citizens at birth, not naturalized, but none of them have yet gotten a case to the Supreme Court to establish if they're "natural-born", whatever the fuck that means. Actually, "have two American citizens has parents" is also in that condition.
by The Alma Mater » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:28 am
by Purpelia » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:33 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
The usually agreed upon definition is that you must be born in the United States.
Or born of US parents. Yes.
But "usually agreed upon" is not the same as "this is what it actually says". Heck, one could argue that it simply excludes robots (sorry Romney), IVF children and Jesus
by The Alma Mater » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:35 am
Purpelia wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:
Or born of US parents. Yes.
But "usually agreed upon" is not the same as "this is what it actually says". Heck, one could argue that it simply excludes robots (sorry Romney), IVF children and Jesus
Well to be fair, given all the things that have been done in his name I wouldn't want Jesus as my president either.
by Purpelia » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:36 am
by The Alma Mater » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:40 am
by Far Easter Republic » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:42 am
Page wrote:If everyone made to work without pay refused to show up to work, shutdowns would end in less than 5 minutes. All it takes is solidarity and everyone being willing to come together. One employee who refuses to show up gets fired, but if no one shows up they can't fire all of them.
by Thermodolia » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:43 am
by The Alma Mater » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:46 am
by Salandriagado » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:47 am
by Thermodolia » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:51 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
The usually agreed upon definition is that you must be born in the United States.
Or born of US parents. Yes.
But "usually agreed upon" is not the same as "this is what it actually says". Heck, one could argue that it simply excludes robots (sorry Romney), IVF children and Jesus
by The Alma Mater » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:52 am
Thermodolia wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:
Or born of US parents. Yes.
But "usually agreed upon" is not the same as "this is what it actually says". Heck, one could argue that it simply excludes robots (sorry Romney), IVF children and Jesus
As Sal linked above US immigration and citizenship law lays out what is and isn’t an automatic citizen of the US. I know it’s hard to understand, especially if you come from a nation where they spell out everything in the constitution
by Thermodolia » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:55 am
by Thermodolia » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:57 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Thermodolia wrote:As Sal linked above US immigration and citizenship law lays out what is and isn’t an automatic citizen of the US. I know it’s hard to understand, especially if you come from a nation where they spell out everything in the constitution
Oh, I know that. The question asked however "where in the constitution does it state that".
And it does not. Which also means it can change easily so that Ah-nold could run.
by Bahktar » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:33 am
Thermodolia wrote: hell the judges on my payroll want it to mean.
And that’s where y’all made your mistake. Arguing with someone who’d readily change massive parts of the constitution and isn’t an originalist
by Salandriagado » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:35 am
Thermodolia wrote:Salandriagado wrote:
Not quite: there's a few edge cases that might or might not be natural-born citizens (and, for that matter, having two American citizens as parents might not count).
Under the current law having at least one parent counts. And tbh I really don’t care if it’s in the constitution or not. Immigration law pretty much states the IM isn’t a automatic citizen and therefore can’t be president.
Which was the original fucking point until Vass got pissy about the damn constitution
by Ifreann » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:39 am
by Valrifell » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:59 am
Ifreann wrote:Hot take: Non-citizens should be able to old any political office, elected or appointed.
by The Alma Mater » Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:06 am
by Ifreann » Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:09 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Duvniask, GMS Greater Miami Shores 1, Google [Bot], Ifreann, Kannap, Kaumudeen, Kaztropol, Kerwa, Lothria, Lower Nubia, Nanatsu no Tsuki, Omphalos, The Jamesian Republic, Valrifall, Zurkerx
Advertisement