Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
John McCain and Barack Obama - Can They Even BE President? Are Senators John McCain and Barack Obama Both Constitutionally Ineligible to be President?by Jake Towne, the Champion of the Constitution
(libertarian)
Monday, September 1, 2008
Unbelievably, this year’s presidential election will be between two candidates who, in a fit of supreme irony in our Constitution-bashing Age, both may be constitutionally ineligible to be President. Both Senators have civil suits pending against them that they are ineligible to run for POTUS. Please note I personally have absolutely no challenge whatsover that they are both US Citizens and at least intend well for the country they are contesting to lead, just that perhaps both do not constitutionally qualify to be President. I also have no pretensions that either civil suit will stop either of them from running and in all likelihood either Senator McCain or The Barackcuda will be coronated in January 2009. However, I have to wonder why in this year of all years, why there cannot be at least one candidate from the major parties where there is no controversy, they were born in Nebraska or New York and grew up there eating corn and hamburgers with two (2) American parents, and that is the end of it. The Washington Times stated on August 28 that "legal scholars say there is no precedent on the subject because all previous presidents have been born within the 50 states or territories that became states."
Remember part of our founding fathers reasoning in setting the requirements for President. They simply did not want to take a chance of any person with say, an aristocratic European background from a country starting with "Eng-" and ending with "-land," immigrating to the USA, becoming a citizen and then President. They wanted to reduce as much as possible the chances of President having loyalties to another nation besides the USA. Is this really that out of tune with the modern globalized world? Should we not allow Arnold Schwartzneggar at least the eligibility to become President if he serves California faithfully for many years? I echo the founding fathers when I say "No Freaking Way, Man." If you start allowing any ex-foreign national or non-natural born citizen to become President, you can not allow yourself to be a hypocrite. How at ease would any of us be, say if a certain ex-Saudi, ex-USSR'er or ex-Pakistani immigrated to the US, became a US citizen, and then President? Sure the odds are against that ever happening in our current I-am-so-petrified-mommy-of-the-scary-terrorists-mommy-please-save-me world in which we live in today, but really though, if you run for President for a party I do not think it would hurt to have an official constitutionality check by a federal court. After all, the presidential oath is to protect and defend the Constitution, so there should be an official check at some point earlier in the process to determine whether the candidate legally qualifies for the office in the first place!
Is John McCain Constitutionally Eligible to be POTUS?
Well, here is the case for John McCain in brief. The facts are clear, but the law is a bit muddy. John McCain was born from two natural born US citizens on a military base in Panama. He grew up on base after base all over the world in the military empire, switching homes and schools at least 20 times. However, the case for constitutionality simply rests on his birth. The below proof is the most rigorous and detailed that I have come across, and its details can be found here:
The 14th Amendment and matching policy limit citizenship to either natural born or naturalized, but not both.
John McCain was born in 1936 in the Canal Zone to citizen parents.
8 USC 1403(a) declares naturalized citizenship in 1952 on persons born in the Canal Zone to citizen parents.
Therefore, 8 USC 1403(a) applies to John McCain at age 16.
Therefore, John McCain is a naturalized citizen.
By treaty, the Canal Zone was not part of the United States.
Therefore, John McCain was not born in the United States.
Therefore, John McCain is a citizen not born in the United States.
Therefore, John McCain is not a natural born citizen.
Article II of the Constitution states to be President a person must be a natural born citizen.
THEREFORE, John McCain is not eligible to be President of the United States under Article II of the Constitution; he should be decertified and removed from all present and future Presidential ballots; and his past results should be disallowed, including unbinding all of his committed delegates.
On August 11, the chairman of California’s American Independent Party (presidential nominee is Ambassador Alan Keyes) sued McCain, the GOP, and the California Secretary of State using the above argument, challenging McCain’s right to place his name on the California ballot in November. The case will be heard by U.S. District Judge William Alsup on 9-11-08. For more details read the August 28 article from the Oakland Tribune here.
Is Barack Obama Constitutionally Eligible to be POTUS?
The case against Senator Obama is perhaps a bit more convoluted as the basic facts of his birth and life are disputed but the law is fairly clear, plus its politically more interesting. Philadelphia lawyer Philip J. Berg on August 21 filed suit in US District Court of Eastern Pennsylvania against Obama, the Democratic National Committee, and the Federal Election Committee. He stated "filed this action at this time to avoid the obvious problems that will occur when the Republican Party raises these issues after Obama is nominated." Note Berg donated money to and is an active supporter of Hillary Clinton. In the past he served as chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery (PA) County, he was a member of the Democratic State Committee, and also was Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania.
Lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia and/or
Has dual or conflicting national loyalties because of his citizenship with Kenya and Indonesia.
Berg alleges Obama’s Hawaiian birth certificate from the state of Hawaii is a forgery per three independent document forensic experts. He alleges Obama was born in Kenya as his mother (Stanley Ann Dunham, aged 18) traveled there with her husband, Barack Obama, a Kenyan national, but was prevented from flying back to Hawaii because of the late stage of her pregnancy. [Wiki trivia: Obama, Sr. and Dunham married in 1961 while Obama, Sr. was still married to his first wife from Kenya, whom he never divorced. Obama, Sr. is dead now, but divorced from Dunham in 1964. So the Barackcuda is literally a son of a bigamist.] Berg claims Obama's own paternal grandmother, half-brother and half-sister have also claimed the same; that Barack was born in Kenya and his mother subsequently flew to Hawaii to register the birth. If Obama was truly born in Kenya, Berg claims, the contemporary laws hold that U.S. citizenship may only pass to a child born overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the former was at least 19 years of age. As Ms. Dunham was too young, therefore citizenship could not legally be passed on to him. Therefore Obama could not be registered as a "natural born" citizen and would therefore be ineligible to seek the presidency pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution.
[Since Senator Obama was once a constitutional law professor, one might have expected him to publish or have a paper ready defending his citizenship status. And pigs will fly.]
Next, even if Obama is deemed "natural born," that United States citizenship was lost in or around 1967 when he and his mother took up residency in Indonesia, where Stanley Ann Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen. Berg also states that he possesses copies of Obama's registration to Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia which clearly show that he was registered under the name "Barry Soetoro" and his citizenship listed as Indonesian. I surmise Berg’s intent is that after this time period Obama never officially regained US citizenship is ineligible to be POTUS, but perhaps its just to suggest conflicting nationalist loyalities. Either way, Wow. Lolo Soetoro and Dunham divorced in 1980 and both are now dead.
Berg alleges Obama has used multiple names throughout his life such as "Barack Hussein Obama," "Barry Soetoro," "Barry Obama," "Barack Dunham," and "Barry Dunham." He then charges that Obama lied on his Illinois bar exam where he failed to acknowledge the use of any other name. Berg concludes that at the very least there is still the issue of multi-citizenship with responsibilities owed to and allegiance to other countries.
What is correct? What is right? Decide for yourself. I do favor clear and open federal court proceedings on both cases. As one will likely become POTUS, the mandate from the Electoral College will be tainted if this wound is allowed to fester. Their reign will be compromised from the start if this critical issue is not dealt with in an honest and public manner. As is often the case in our two-party democracy, when the "chief of the successful partisans" steps into power, the losing side will whine incessantly about how they lost. What hope do the American people have of their President obeying his oath to defend the Constitution if they see these candidates brush these claims under the carpet or act in a dishonest manner in defiance of the rule of law? Why must I feel that even I, by writing a simple column, am doing a better job of championing the Constitution?
Here is Tom Paine from the post-Revolutionary War world of 1782. He was referring to the European powers of his day but, sadly, I believe his comments apply to our America:
"[The purpose] of other nations are, in general, little more than the history of their quarrels. They are marked by no important character in the annals of events; mixed in the mass of general matters, they occupy but a common page; and while the chief of the successful partisans stepped into power, the plundered multitude sat down and sorrowed. Triumph on one side and misery on the other were the only events. Pains, punishments, torture, and death were made the business of mankind, until compassion, the fairest associate of the heart, was driven from its place, and the eye, accustomed to continual cruelty, could behold it without offence.
But as the principles of the present Revolution differed from those which preceded it, so likewise did the conduct of America both in government and war. Neither the foul finger of disgrace has hitherto put a blot upon her fame. War, so much the trade of the world, has here only been the business of necessity; and when the necessity shall cease, her very enemies must confess, that as she drew the sword in her just defence, she used it without cruelty, and sheathed it without revenge."
I have a confession to make. Obama or McCain, McBama, whatever, it really doesn’t matter to me. If you read my articles, you will find out why and also why a new Revolution has begun. My only question is will you join me?
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
As always, unlike the NFL, the author grants full permission to allow any accounts of, rebroadcasts, retransmissions, repostings in part or full of this article to your blog or anywhere else in order to promote the Restoration of our Republic.
Veritas numquam perit. Veritas odit moras. Veritas vincit. Truth never perishes. Truth hates delay. Truth conquers.
"When the truth walks away, Everybody stays! Because the truth about the world is that crime does pay!
So if you walk away, Who is gonna stay? Because I'd like to think the world is a better place!"
Tortured Twins: John McCain and the Trial of Khaled Sheikh Mohammed Published: September 2, 2008 To very little public fanfare from my beloved American media, a Mockery of a Trial of Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, alleged al-Qaeda mastermind, is getting underway in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Is John McCain losing any sleep over it? Doubt it.
America, Were Michael Phelps' Eight Olympic Gold Medals Worth Winning? Published: August 24, 2008 Michael Phelps and other American athletes are bringing back loads of Gold, Silver, and Bronze Medals from the Beijing Olympics. A young libertarian economist asks if it was worth it.
Ron Paul and the Struggles of Attrition Published: August 17, 2008 My comment on Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty after reading David Nolan's and Walt Thiessen's recent Bob Barr pieces.
A Salute to Malalai Joya - Afghanistan's Tom Paine Published: August 8, 2008 Malalai Joya, a brave lady and banned legislator from Afghanistan, fights for justice, human rights, and democracy. She battles both the Warlords in power, the Taliban... and the American Government, which is probably why you have never heard of her.
Police State Invades Mayor's Home & Kills His Dogs (UPDATED) Published: August 1, 2008 "It was inconceivable to me that my government would be coming through my door." - the Mayor of Berwyn Heights, Maryland, or a recent police raid on his residence
We the People versus the Might of the US Government Published: March 2, 2008 What do the experiences of SAS trooper Ben Griffin, Hope Steffey, and Jose Padilla all have in common? They show the Might of Government is overwhelming Right. We the People want Justice!
The views expressed in this
article are those of Jake Towne, the Champion of the Constitution only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Jake Towne, the Champion of the Constitution is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Jake; This is the most beautiful manuscript I have ever read to deal with the problem facing us today, Violations to constitutional requirements. I rise only to speak to one flaw. We are not a democracy. That was considered by the founders but rejected.they called it a volcano that would eventually consume itself. They instead decided on a "Republic". The difference being the source of it's authority, The mob or the Rule of Law. Thanks again. Ron
I did not mean the 'WTF?' it in a bad way. I was just amazed and puzzled. I knew about McCain's Panama-birth issue but I did not know about the more F...d-up Obama issue which at this point is just an allegation in court but if it is true we will have a Kenyan-Indonesian non-American President. So if Indonesia invades the U.S., who is Obama's side with?. Both of these birth issues need to be resolved before elections.
I originally thought that the president was supposed to be born in any of the 50 states of the Union. I thoguth that even people born in Washington D.C. were not qualified to be POTUS because D.C. is not a State of the Union. I am an American by birth because I was born in the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico but not a state. I originally thought that I was disqualified to be POTUS because, althought I was born in the U.S.A., I was not born in a state of the Union. But if McCain and Obama can run, them maybe I can run for president as well. I should start campaigning for 2012.
furthermore, if the allegations about Obama are true and he knowingly hid this information or forged his documents then Obama should not only be disqualified, but he should also be jailed. If he did not know and the forgery was that of his parents, then he should be at no fault but disqualifed to be POTUS nevertheless.
Nice writing about this Jake. I wonder why I have not seen this covered more thoroughly in the MSM.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-09-02 14:59:10
Ron Moss - Damn you are right I did say "democracy," but actually thats more like what our system functions like these days, so I wont remove it. In the italics section I usually paste in it says 'restoration of our Republic' so I will still sleep easy at night.
trd - not sure if I'd make a good VP, but what the heck? The MSM is horrible, you might not agree with me here but perhaps worth a read anyways
Also, I got a piece of valid feedback from Liberty Maven site, from a wrwalton. I dont have time to check it out, as I need to catch a plane but sounds interesting:
"Neither John McCain nor Barack Obama should have any trouble establishing they are United States citizens at birth.
McCain's birth is covered by the statute 28 USC 1403(a) because born in the Canal Zone to parents, at least one of whom were then citizens of the United States, as well as by 28 USC 1401(e), because born in an outlying possession of the United States of at least one parent who was then a citizen of the United States and who had been physically present in either the United States or an outlying possession of the United States for a period of at least one year at any time prior to the child's birth.
Obama's birth, even if in Kenya, is covered by 28 USC 1401(g), because his mother, a citizen of the United States, while not yet nineteen, had been physically present in the United States "for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years".
In each case the statute grants the person citizenship by reason of their status at birth, and therefore the person is a natural born citizen of the United States, not requiring naturalization, and therefore constitutionally eligible to serve as President.
Also, a child does not lose U.S. citizenship if a parent marries a non-citizen, or even if adopted by a non-citizen. In fact, even adult Americans, if they can accept dual citizenship from another country without renouncing their U.S. citizenship, do not lose their U.S. citizenship when they do so. A person who applies to become a naturalized citizen of the United States must renounce his or her allegiance to any foreign state or sovereign."
Jake; Thanks for your research on this matter. It speaks to why the Grand New Party is appropriate, at this time. Timing is important especially when we are dealing with freedomm Prosperity etc. My son skates for Disney on Ice and last year was exposed to 9 countries in and near Europe. His appreciation for America has changed his view on Poverty, Freedom, and Militias.Why we have the 2nd Amenment. and the Tenth.
From my research, I think that both John McCain and Barack Obama are each ineligible for POTUS because of their situation at birth. Neither John McCain nor Barack Obama has absolutely, positively, incontestably and authentically documented their exact birthplace, along with the proper legal requirements of each of their parents respectively.
The Supreme Law of the Land, is the U S Constitution. The authors of the Constitution gave a specific process to add to or subtract from the Constitution and that is by amendment.
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. In the Fourteenth Amendment the eligible group allowed Citizenship was expanded from free white men to "All Persons".
All the discussion now is nothing more than hot air and a waste of time. The point is that one cannot build a viable position on a non-existent foundation. In this case the foundation is the U S Constitution and the intent of the authors, not by Status of Forces Agreements nor 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, nor by military men who have babies on foreign soil, calling them "Natural Born Citizens" and have them run for POTUS some day.
There is no such requirement when born within one of the several States of the union or Washington D. C. Parents do not have to prove anything. The U.S. Congress has the authority to make rules concerning "Naturalization." What is described is a declaration of Citizenship, a form of regulated naturalization. The U.S. Congress, The Supreme Court, The Senate, The President of the United States, The U.S. District Judge William Alsup, The Senator John McCain or The Senator Barack Obama has no authority in law or reason to "declare" anyone a "Natural Born Citizen". One either is or is not. If you are a "Natural Born Citizen" there would be no need for a "declaration" made by Congress through the U.S. Code, or by any other means.
From my research, I think that both John McCain and Barack Obama are each ineligible for POTUS because of their situation at birth. Neither John McCain nor Barack Obama has absolutely, positively, incontestably and authentically documented their exact birthplace, along with the proper legal requirements of each of their parents respectively.
The Supreme Law of the Land, is the U S Constitution. The authors of the Constitution gave a specific process to add to or subtract from the Constitution and that is by amendment.
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. In the Fourteenth Amendment the eligible group allowed Citizenship was expanded from free white men to "All Persons".
All the discussion now is nothing more than hot air and a waste of time. The point is that one cannot build a viable position on a non-existent foundation. In this case the foundation is the U S Constitution and the intent of the authors, not by Status of Forces Agreements nor 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, nor by military men who have babies on foreign soil, calling them "Natural Born Citizens" and have them run for POTUS some day.
There is no such requirement when born within one of the several States of the union or Washington D. C. Parents do not have to prove anything. The U.S. Congress has the authority to make rules concerning "Naturalization." What is described is a declaration of Citizenship, a form of regulated naturalization. The U.S. Congress, The Supreme Court, The Senate, The President of the United States, The U.S. District Judge William Alsup, The Senator John McCain or The Senator Barack Obama has no authority in law or reason to "declare" anyone a "Natural Born Citizen". One either is or is not. If you are a "Natural Born Citizen" there would be no need for a "declaration" made by Congress through the U.S. Code, or by any other means.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
