The requirements for citizenship and the very definition thereof have changed since the Constitution was ratified in 1788. Congress first extended citizenship to children born to U.S. parents overseas on March 26, 1790, under the first naturalization law: "And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."[1]
[
link to en.wikipedia.org]
5. November 14, 1986 to Present
If at the time of your birth, both your parents were U.S. citizens, and at least one had a prior residence in the United States, you automatically acquired U.S. citizenship with no conditions for retaining it.
[
link to immigration.findlaw.com]
Three major candidates have sought the Presidency who were born outside the United States: Barry Goldwater (ran in 1964) was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory, George Romney (ran in 1968) was born in Mexico to U.S. parents, and John McCain (ran in 2000 and running in 2008) was born in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Barry Goldwater's case among these three is unique in that although Arizona was not a state, it was a fully incorporated territory of the United States, making it debatable whether or not he was born "outside" the United States. The Panama Canal Zone was under United States sovereignty between 1903 and 1979.[7] Neither Goldwater nor Romney was elected, so it has never been fully addressed whether children born to Americans overseas are "natural-born citizens" and thus eligible for the Presidency. However, McCain is currently seeking the 2008 Republican nomination for President.
[
link to en.wikipedia.org]
Congress cannot pass laws that contradict the Constitution.
The requirements are very specific in the Constitution -
you know, "That God Damned Piece Of Paper", unless there
is a ratified Constitutional Amendment stating the
change. But even such Amendments have been questioned,
as Amendments can only clarify or elaborate upon the basic
Constitution, not contradict it. The original 13th Amendment
only added a penalty to a provision that was already within the
Original Constitution and Articles of Confederation,
and, expanded those provisions to include the prohibition of 'special honors'.
The Constitution left the terms of 'naturalization' to
Congress, and that is to what your references refer.
"Naturalization' does not mean 'natural born on American
soil, be it a State, territory or embassy.
Here is an article I just posted on the same issue
as McCain's eligibility
Wrong the canal was a us territory at the time. We have already been through this as a country, he is Eligible!
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 351956I strongly suspect that it is you who are WRONG.
Unless, of course, you can come up with a law
that defends your argument.
I can produce the law that says you are incorrect.
McCain is not eligible to be President of the USA.
If you look at 8 USC 1403(a), it addressed McCain’s situation rather clearly:
“(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.”
So it’s pretty clear that John McCain is a citizen.
But is he a natural born (jus soli) citizen or a naturalized (lex soli) citizen? This is where it gets tricky.
Because 8 USC 1403(a) uses the term “is declared to be a citizen” (emphasis added), that leans heavily towards a lex soli position (naturalization). And persons born to citizens between November 1903 (when Panama became independent from Colombia with U.S. intervention) and February 1904 are not declared citizens under this section, which indicates that the declaration of citizenship is simply a naturalization and not by birth since it is dependent on the law and a calendar date.
But is there anything more concrete than that? The Supreme Court has never addressed the specifics of a natural born citizen, except once in passing, in the dissent of the infamous Dred Scott case, of all places, so it really has no bearing. Other cases have looked at citizenship, but not specifically the natural born part of it.
Historically, the term “natural born” was put in Article II at the request of John Jay (who later helped write the Federalist Papers, became the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and pointed out in 1796 that jury nullification is a right and duty of the people) to George Washington in a letter from 25 July 1787.
McCain has claimed that the Naturalization Act of 1790 (26 March 1790) covers his status as a natural born citizen. THAT IS NOT TRUE. A close look at the Act indicates that it only covers “admission as a citizen” (meaning naturalization), and that Act was repealed in part 29 January 1795 and again in total 14 April 1802. So that argument does not work because it was repealed and because it creates naturalization instead of natural born citizenship.
That leads us all back to the Constitution. The citizenship definitions of both Article II and Amendment 14 apply in terms of McCain running for President.
But there’s more. If you look at the 14th Amendment, the term “in the United States” is there. What does that mean, specifically?
“In the United States” is generally thought to mean the States, territories, protectorates, and embassies. But the wording is never clear in the law on what exactly the jurisdiction of the United States explicitly is.
[Nowhere is 'military base or installation' mentioned.]
But if you look again at 8 USC 1401(c) and 1403(a), you see a big difference. 8 USC 1401(c) address births outside the U.S., meaning clearly that the “born in the United States” clause of the 14th Amendment cannot apply to this form of citizenship.
Therefore a person that falls under 8 USC 1401(c) has to be a NATURALIZED citizen. 8 USC 1403(a) already “declares” citizenship and implies naturalization. The only logical conclusion is that the Canal Zone was considered to be outside the United States, else these sections (8 USC 1401(c) and 8 USC 1403(a)) never needed to be codified into law in the first place, and 8 USC 1401(a) would apply instead (see above).
