Times Set To Rip Off A Blog Post As News? McCain Not Eligible To Serve

Update: The Times item is out - there will need to be an official ruling.

"There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent,” said Sarah H. Duggin, an associate professor of law at Catholic University who has studied the issue extensively. “It is not a slam-dunk situation.”

Interesting. Drudge is heading - sans link - the New York Times is set to question whether or not McCain can legally serve as President because of where he was born.

NYT: MCCAIN'S BIRTHPLACE IN CANAL ZONE RAISES ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONS...

There appears to already be a complete discussion of the issue with yesterday's date here.

McCain is definitely a citizen, the natural born qualification is subject to debate. Hmm. Second look anybody else?

It might. No, this isn’t some desperate left-wing smear. As someone who is considering voting for McCain, I have no particular ideological agenda to push here. Even if I did, that would hardly change the fact that this is a serious Constitutional dispute, one that could well result in McCain being declared ineligible to run for the Oval Office.

It all depends on what the definition of a “natural born” citizen is, whether or not one can even legislate “natural born” citizenship in the first place and, strangely enough, what the difference between “after” and “at” birth is. As said earlier, McCain’s troubles stem from the Constitution. Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 states that “No person except a natural born Citizen… shall be eligible to the Office of President.” Again, the key words here are “natural born Citizen.”

McCain was born on a military base in Panama. Obviously, Panama is not part of the United States. Less obviously, the Panama Canal and its subsequent military bases, despite being run at the time by the United States, were not actually sovereign territory of the United States. Contrary to popular knowledge of the law, being born at a U.S. embassy or military base does not in and of itself confer citizenship. Does that mean McCain isn’t a citizen? No, he most definitely is.

Comments

[Scrapiron]

Born on a military post anywhere in the world is considered born on U.S. property and therefore a citizen. The left is simply showing how scared they are that something will pop up on King Barak Hussein Osama Obama. Osama Obama was born in Hawaii from a sham marriage between a white woman and an Arab (also illegal since his father was married to another woman at the time) to prevent the Arab from being deported. Start off lefties and we'll see what kind of tangled web mixed with half truths we can weave that Americans will believe. I can introduce you to at least a hundred life long democrats that state they will never vote for an Arab no matter what he claims to be. It's been fun and games so far, but the tough part is coming on.

[Michigan Repulican]

If you are born of two US Citizens you are a US Citizen, regardless of where in the world you are born.

[Anon]

"Natural born" citizen means an American citizen since birth. McCain qualifies. Moreover, McCain was born in a US military hospital to two American citizen parents. For purposes of citizenship, that military hospital is considered US soil. But, yes, let's let the dying NYT promote the argument that the children of US service members serving their country overseas aren't citizens. Yes, let's let them have this discussion. And let's ask the Democrat candidates if they believe the children born to US soldiers serving their nation overseas are, in fact, US citizens. I bet Obama's people tonight are saying, "Jeez, the New York Times is about to bump McCain's poll numbers up a few more notches. Isn't there someone over there we can call?"

[Ronald Truman]

"Natural born citizen" means that the birth mother did not receive an epideral to mitigate the pain of birth. How would the NY Times know that about McCain's birth? Solid investigative reporting, that's how. Best, Ronald

[jordan]

NYT knows this isn't right, they're just throwing it out there to plant the question in peoples' minds. if true, then no children/dependents of any military or diplomatic personnel stationed around the world would ever be eligible to serve as President. There's no "lesser status" of citizenship for these individuals. If born off-base of two U.S. citizen parents, you just get a U.S. State Dept-issued. birth certificate documenting that this is an American baby. The founding fathers were using the "natural born" concept in a time when Americans weren't deployed in 80 countries around the world.

[BobInStamford]

"Osama Obama was born in Hawaii from a sham marriage between a white woman and an Arab"

Rednecks is funny.

[Kaitian]

This is a bullshit argument that the NYT is pushing. Being born to 2 parents that are American citizens guarantees that you are a natural born citizen. The Supreme Court has supported this argument and the fact he was born in a US military hospital. Would we say Mel Gibson isn't a natural born citizen because his parents weren't Americans? Hell no. That would open a can of worms regarding all the people that were born here in the United States especially those of illegal aliens.

Let the NYT keep this crap up and bump McCain's number a notch. It would help speed up the death of the Gray Lady.

[Steven Den Beste]

I agree with the above. "Natural born" is distinct from "naturalized", someone who became a citizen later. I'm sure if it goes to court, that's what the court will decide.

[seekeronos]

"--- NYT knows this isn't right, they're just throwing it out there to plant the question in peoples' minds. ---"

It rates right up there with the Madrassa argument (at least as far as the libs are whinging about B. Hussein Obama's attendance at a primarily Islamic "secular" school in Jakarta for a few years).

Thing is, there is little disputing that he was in attendance at a school in an Islamic country wherein he was exposed to Islamist influences as a child, and that it is increasingly a matter of record that he has sought to connect to his father and his father's family and the Islamist culture that shaped them.

[Roy Mustang]

First the Iseman "sex scandel" and now this?

Somebody at the NYT must really love McCain to lob him softballs like this. I wonder if McCain's campaign coordinated this? Now that would be a real scandal.

[Joe Citizen]

You guys don't understand what is really going on here.

We want all of you to go on record arguing that a US military base is soverign US territory. Thus you can undermine the whole legal cocoon that the Bush administration has built around Gitmo - with their absurd claim that it is not under US legal jurisdiction.

You want McCain, then we own Gitmo.

[seekeronos]

Base sovereignty is irrelevant.

The fact that McCain's parents are both US citizens is. If there was any serious question as to McCain's citizenship, it would have come to light in his 2000 bid, and any naturalization paperwork would have surfaced.

You loose... Thanks for playing, Libs!

[ChenZhen]

The debate over what constitutes "natural-born" is certainly an interesting one, but unless someone is going to make a stink over it in McCain's case it's would appear to be moot. I can't imagine that anyone would, so he's safe. There really outta be a better definition though.

[ChenZhen]

The debate over what constitutes "natural-born" is certainly an interesting one, but unless someone is going to make a stink over it in McCain's case it's would appear to be moot. I can't imagine that anyone would, so he's safe. There really outta be a better definition though.

[OVERSEAS MILITARY]

"You want McCain, then we own Gitmo."

Any attempt to tie this to Gitmo will fail. I have been stationed at overseas US bases in Europe and Asia, and neither was considered US territory - both bases were legally property of the Host Nation's armed forces. We do have agreements with the Host Nations (called Status of Forces Agreements, or SOFAs) which give the US military primary jurisdiction and can appear grant sovereignty, but they are not US territory.
In fact, the US sends Cuba a check every year to pay the rent on the lease for GTMO that was negotiated with the Batista regime. Castro never cashed the checks, because that would be implicit acceptance of the US Navy presence.
The Panama Canal Zone MAY have actually been US sovereign territory - not sure of the details since I was never stationed there - but that will not affect the status of GTMO.

[Bandit]

Please, please push that a decorated war vet who was born on a US base isn't eligible - please, please.

[BobInStamford]

Newsflash, what makes your heroic former captive ineligible isn't where he was born, but the fact that he was born in 1916!

[syn]

NY Times endored McCain.

[syn]

Make that 'endorsed'

[seekeronos]

"--- Newsflash, what makes your heroic former captive ineligible isn't where he was born, but the fact that he was born in 1916! ---"

And the BoobinTheBasement demonstrates his stupidity (willful foolishness) once again.

As for Panama Canal Zone, the canal itself was a sovereign US territory from 1903-1979 (until Jimmah Cartuh signed it away). Being actually born in 1936, Johnny Mac would have had _jus soli_ citizenship in addition to his _jus sanguinis_ (citizenship by birth to parents who were citizens).

Being that he is the son and grandson of US Navay admirals, and that there should be little question as to his mother's citizenship (born in Muskogee, OK - a state which had formed several years prior to her birth in 1912)... he is unquestionably a natural-born American citizen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal_Zone

[scotth]

"the natural born qualification is subject to debate. Hmm."

I used to really like this blog. whoever did the OP, and I guess it's the same person with the perpetual McCain hate syndrome, is just as bad as the NYTs. Anyone with any knowledge of this subject knows of the law past just a few years after the Constitution was ratified. Hint, it defines "natural born." Hmm. It remains as the updated TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1401. That should clear things up for your a bit, Mr. Riehl, or whoever you are.

[Neo]

U. S. Senator Barack Obama is a citizen of Kenya and became a citizen of Kenya under the Independence Constitution of Kenya in 1963. Obama has never renounced his Kenyan citizenship. He is also a U. S. Citizen.

http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=731

[Dadmanly]

You are gorssly misinformed. A child born abroad to a US citizen in the military is automatically granted US citizenship as "natural born." They are usually given birth certificates with a title, "US Citizen Born Abroad," issued by the US State Dept.

My daughter was born in Germany in 1987 while stationed there, she was born in a German hospital (off base), yet the process is well understood by military and even German authorities, who confirmed at the time that my daughter WAS NOR eligible for (dual) German citizenship.

The US State Dept. processed and issued the birth certificate as part of normal counsular activities.

[Dan Riehl]

"Mr. Riehl, or whoever you are."

Well, Scott "H" - whoever the hell that is - you conveniently ignore the distinction between naturalized and natural born - Dadmanly, you are making the same mistake. And my position is not that McCain, or another similarly situated individual should be disqualified, it is an issue to be determined by law. And right now, that law is contestable. That's unacceptable - it needs to be resolved. Good heavens, McCain has Ted Olson on it - you really think that's just for exercise? Use your freaking heads for a change, instead of responsing out of emotion because you either like McCain, or have a service background.

I'm not arguing he can't be President - but simply pointing out there can be NO ambiguity prior to election day. And currently there is, whether any of you like it, or not.

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

This newfound affinity for *gasp* consulting actual, primary, factually-based authority to refute a silly story is just so precious.

[scotth]

"you conveniently ignore the distinction between naturalized and natural born -"

The law I sited didn't ignore it.If you'd have read it, you would see I was not ignoring the differences. Naturalized by definition means to become a citizen. You don't have to become one if you are born one.

The law states that being born overseas to US citizens makes you a natural born citizen. I cited the law. Maybe you should take the time to read it.

I'll past the permanent part of § 1401 here for you. No ambiguity in it.

(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

Now look up the meaning of naturalized. The above is not naturalized. it's natural. I was born in Germany. I was issued a United States birth certificate. Why? Because both of my parents were American citizens.

[scotth]

Pardon the typos and syntax. I'm used to edited after the fact.

[Thomas Jackson]

BobbyinStamford:
Idiots are funny. They don't run in your family they gallop.