U.S. Senator Duckworth Holds Dual-Citizenship and Dual-Allegiance to Two Countries

U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth Not Constitutionally Eligible to be President and Commander-in-Chief or Vice President. She is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States. She Was Born in Thailand.

by CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret), ©2020

(Jun. 2, 2020) — U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth holds – dual-Citizenship at birth – Thailand and the USA – and thus was born with foreign influence and dual-allegiance requirements to both countries. She was born in Thailand. She does not have Unity of Citizenship and Sole Allegiance at birth to the USA and only the USA. Thus she is constitutionally not eligible to be the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military or the Vice President, which offices require singular citizenship and national allegiance at and since birth per the founders and framers. Dual-citizens at birth are not eligible. For more information:

http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/Tammy-Duckworth-petition-not-constitutionally-eligible-for-VP-or-Pres.pdf

Click here for more historical and constitutional information about who is a “natural born Citizen” and who is not

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty/lists
http://www.protectourliberty.org

Read the rest here.

 

28 Responses to "U.S. Senator Duckworth Holds Dual-Citizenship and Dual-Allegiance to Two Countries"

  1. Marion Urban   Saturday, July 11, 2020 at 6:10 PM

    I completely agree with Robert Laity, (JULY 8). Studying the dual citizenship for some time now, i just don’t understand how these people get their documentation. I was born in Poland in 1949 to a father who was born in Chicago in 1917 to 2 permanent resident parents from Austro-Hungary, he acquired the citizenship of his parents by descent, and United States citizenship by birth on the soil, therefore “dual Nationality”, did not qualify for president. In 1922 his mother took him back without his fathers knowledge or permission, to what was after WW1 Poland. My father was in WW2 in France, was captured in 1941 and spent 5 years in a forced labor camp for French and Belgian POWs. After the war he met my mother in France, who was born in Poland, moved to France when 1 year old, grew up and went to school in France. My parents were married in France in 1946, they went to Poland in 1948, i was born Poland in 1949. The law in Poland at the time of my birth was, “the polish citizenship law of 1920”, Article 5: The wife acquires the condition of the husband, the children in wedlock that of the father, out of wedlock that of the mother. So i was born with “dual nationality”. My father came back U.S. in 1960, i came in 1961. I filled for a FOIA in 2012, it says among other things “son of U.S.A. citizen”. 60 years in this country working paying taxes, drafted for Viet-Nam in 1968, unable to get a real I.D., passport or any other confirmation of my U.S. citizenship, while half of the Congress are “dual citizens”, they have 2 and some cases 3 passports. So you see i am very much interested in what is in those sealed files, in particular Obama, Cruz etc. John McCain senate resolution 511?. Seems to me all you have to do is run for office and all your wishes are granted. Thank You

  2. Robert Laity   Wednesday, July 8, 2020 at 2:23 AM

    Dave, One’s parents MUST both be U.S. Citizens. a person who wants to be President or VP MUST also be born IN the United States. That does NOT include U.S. Embassies, U.S. Military Bases in foreign nations,ships at sea or planes in the air outside the continental limits. Nor does it include unincorporated territories of the U.S. One MUST be born IN the U.S. to parents who are BOTH U.S. Citizens. Period! There are NO exceptions.

  3. Marion   Tuesday, July 7, 2020 at 5:03 PM

    Ludlam v. Ludlam, 26 N.Y. 356 (NY 1863)

    The rule of nationality by descent was part of the common law. (law of nature)
    partus sequitur patrem, (The offspring follows the father,-the condition of the father.)
    sub potestate viri, (Of a wife) under the protection of a husband.)

  4. Nikita's_UN_Shoe   Friday, July 3, 2020 at 8:44 AM

    Dave, you allowed my hamburger to be left on the grille too long while you were keyboarding at The Post & Email; now, throw that burnt offering in the trash and place a fresh patty on the grille for me.

    I don’t espouse to Wikipedia, per se, but here is an extract from that debatable source and sometimes their data are near spot-on:

    Re: Naturalization Act (1790).

    The Act also provided that children born abroad when both parents are U.S. citizens “shall be considered as natural born citizens,” but specified that the right of citizenship did “not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.”[3][4][5] This act was the only US statute to ever to use the term “natural born citizen”, found in the US Constitution in relation to the prerequisites for a person to serve as President or Vice-President, and the term was removed by the Naturalization Act of 1795.

    Dave: Do not conflate “natural born” with “naturalization”. Here’s why, again from Wikipedia and notice that the “mother” was not mentioned in above statute, perhaps because there was that pesky coverture thing going on at the time.

    Naturalization is the legal act or process by which a non-citizen of a country may acquire citizenship or nationality of that country.[1] It may be done automatically by a statute, i.e., without any effort on the part of the individual, or it may involve an application or a motion and approval by legal authorities.[2] The rules of naturalization vary from country to country but typically include a promise to obey and uphold that country’s laws,[3] taking and subscribing to the oath of allegiance, and may specify other requirements such as a minimum legal residency and adequate knowledge of the national dominant language or culture. To counter multiple citizenship, most countries require that applicants for naturalization renounce any other citizenship that they currently hold, but whether this renunciation actually causes loss of original citizenship, as seen by the host country and by the original country, will depend on the laws of the countries involved.

    The parents of the little Tammy Duckworth were required by US law to register their little darling so that she could acquire US citizen – you know, “by-the-book”.

    Remember Dave – there are only two instances of the use of the phrase “natural born Citizen” within the legal documentation of the USA:
    1.) US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.
    2.) Naturalization Act (1790) – scrubbed out of legal (repealed) use by the Naturalization Act (1795).

    A. All individuals in the USA that derive US citizenship via legislation (positive) laws are STATUTORY US citizens.
    B. Congress cannot make ANYONE a natural born Citizen, because a natural born Citizen is a US citizen through the law of nature – a natural happening by being born in the country to two citizens who are already citizens of that country (USA).
    C. IF – anyone could be made a natural born Citizen via legislative laws, then the words “natural born Citizen” would be included (appear) within that statute. I will expect a free hamburger if you can locate the phrase “natural born Citizen” within any current US law.

    Lettuce, pickles, mustard. Hold the uncooked onions, please.
    It just doesn’t seem natural to put a square meat patty on a round bun.

  5. James Carter   Friday, July 3, 2020 at 8:23 AM

    It is intellectually dishonest to argue that a person born to parents who are not citizens of the same country was born with allegiance to only one of those countries.

    It is also intellectually dishonest to argue that “citizen” and “natural born citizen” are the same, if for no other reason than the U.S. Constitution differentiates them by allowing only the latter to serve as President while allowing both to serve in every other office. Every “natural born citizen” is also a “citizen” but not every “citizen” is also a “natural born citizen”.

  6. Madi   Friday, July 3, 2020 at 8:11 AM

    Now we know , social laws, social justice and social constitution.
    Nothing is a conspiracy, everything is to bizarre and to many coincidence.

    The only person who had the b#$@& to tell it like it is on National TV was Donald J Trump, our current brave President.

    535 peoples who had the duty to support our constitution : law of the land
    rPresident O
    Bush lied about WMD, to take us to war in Irak
    Hillary Bengazi
    SCotus ? Passenger on Lolita Express
    Suicide /murder Epstein

  7. Dave   Friday, July 3, 2020 at 2:06 AM

    Obama s mother was from kansas and she was a natural born citizen.doesnt matter who the father was, Obama was a natural born citizen because his mother was. I didnt vote for him but I should of.Was Duckworths mother a natural born citizen?If not shes ineligible.

  8. Nikita's_UN_Shoe   Friday, June 5, 2020 at 2:14 PM

    The following is an abbreviated version, including modified plagiarized text from experts who frequent this website (thank you), of my contact email to current US Senator from Illinois, Tammy Duckworth:

    “If you have any notion or designs to be Joe Biden’s running mate, also know as (aka) the Vice President (VP) nominee, allow me to burst your Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 and Amendment 12 bubbles. You are not eligible under the US Constitution. Period.”

    “You are not a natural born Citizen (NBC). You became a naturalized US citizen under 8 USC 1401, which is a man-made naturalization law enacted by Congress as part of U.S. statutory positive law under the naturalization powers granted to Congress under Article I of the U.S. Constitution. 8 USC 1401 naturalizes certain individuals at birth instead of requiring said persons to undergo the naturalization process in later life. It is a man-made statutory positive law. It is not natural law.”

    “People are an NBC by the act of nature, otherwise known as natural law i.e., born in the U.S.A. to two U.S. citizen parents. These two parents can be either all natural born Citizens, all statutory U.S. citizens, or a combination of those two types of citizens. Congress can only grant statutory (positive laws) U.S. citizenship. Repeated: Only those persons born in the U.S.A. to two U.S. citizen parents are natural born Citizens; all others who do not meet the NBC specification are statutory U.S. citizens and are only eligible for the U.S. Congress or for the U.S. Supreme Court. The authors and signers of SR 511 positively misled their constituents through political trickery.”

    “Here is the last sentence of Amendment XII: “But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.””

    “So you see, if you still have designs on the Vice Presidency under sleepy Joe, that would make you a designer natural born Citizen, i.e.. design your natural born citizenship to the whims of your political wind.”

  9. James Carter   Friday, June 5, 2020 at 9:43 AM

    “Justice Thomas gave us a sense of the Court.”

    He most certainly did. During his testimony before a House committee circa 2010 he said “We’re [SCOTUS] evading that one [Obama’s eligibility].”

    Why evade ruling Obama eligible?

  10. James Carter   Friday, June 5, 2020 at 8:51 AM

    @CDR Kerchner (Ret)

    Thank you for that link. I knew someone here had compiled such a list but couldn’t remember who.

    Thank you also for all the full-page “infomercials” you placed in the Washington Times concurrent with Obama’s (P)residency.

  11. Robert Christopher Laity   Friday, June 5, 2020 at 3:57 AM

    Lew, with all due respect, are you dense? I doubt that is what Thomas said. You did not cite the case in which you allege he said it. It is clearly an erroneous opinion that is contrary to law. I TOLD you more than once. Yours is a losing argument. See the Naturalization Act of 1790 and The NA of 1795. Persons born overseas, even to two US Parents are NOT “Natural Born Citizen[s]”. I must give you a failing grade of “F minus”.

  12. Lew Harper   Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 8:35 PM

    “Justice Thomas erred.”

    March 23rd, 2015 – Ted Cruz announced run for Presidency.

    March 23rd, 2015 – Donald Trump questions if Cruz is eligible.

    “Well he’s got, you know, a hurdle that nobody else seems to have at this moment. It’s a hurdle, and somebody could certainly look at it very seriously. He was born in Canada, if you know, and when we all studied our history lessons… you’re supposed to be born in this country, so I just don’t know how the courts would rule on it. But it’s an additional hurdle that he has that no one else seems to have.”

    June 8th, 2015 – Justice Thomas writes that children born overseas to US citizen parents are “natural-born citizens”.

    Hardly an error.

    Justice Thomas gave us a sense of the Court. He did not need to use the term natural-born citizen.

  13. CDR Kerchner (Ret)   Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 3:12 PM

    Hi James: The various efforts by members of both major political parties in the years prior to the 2008 election cycle to remove or abrogate the “natural born Citizen” presidential eligibility clause in the U.S. Constitution are documented at this website: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html CDR Kerchner (Ret) – http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

  14. CDR Kerchner (Ret)   Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 12:28 PM

    Justice Thomas erred. And the U.S. Supreme Court is avoiding the issue as Justice Thomas said … because they know the answers that would be brought up in a direct hearing of that constitutional term “natural born Citizen”, would have been adverse to Obama and others who were also seeking the Presidency in both major political parties who were not Article II “natural born Citizens” of the United States. USC 1401 is a man-made naturalization law enacted by Congress as part of U.S. statutory positive law under the naturalization powers granted to Congress under Article I of the U.S. Constitution. 1401 naturalizes certain individual at birth instead of requiring said persons to undergo the naturalization process in later life. It is a man-made statutory positive law. It is not natural law. The words “natural born” are not even in the law. Read it. It addresses naturalization of certain persons for various situations at birth. The only situation it does not address is persons born in the USA to two citizen parents who were both citizens (born or naturalized) at the time of their child’s birth. The reason that scenario is not in the 1401 naturalization law is because those persons don’t need any man-made law to address their citizenship status at birth. They ARE the natural born Citizens. They are born with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the USA at birth. They become citizens of the USA at birth by virtue of natural law. See Vattel’s treatise on natural law – Volume 1 Section 212 for more on the natural law principles of citizenship.

    In legal parlance any phrase which has the adjective or word natural in it, said phrase refers to natural law and the laws of nature, not something man-made, not man-made positive law. USC 1401 makes certain people “Citizens” at birth. It does not make them “natural born Citizens” at birth. Adjectives mean something. Especially in the U.S. Constitution as to who can be the President and Commander-in-Chief or the VP. See: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ and https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/tag/euler-diagram/ CDR Kerchner (Ret) – http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

  15. James Carter   Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 10:22 AM

    Lew Harper,

    For SIXTEEN YEARS, 1991-2007, Acton & Dystel’s bio of Obama stated he was born in Kenya. Approximately two weeks after he announced his candidacy for president it stated he was born in Hawaii. THAT was no coincidence.

    From 2004-2008, several members of Congress introduced legislation to either define “natural born citizen” as everything except ‘born in the country to citizen parents of the country’ — meaning they all knew the founders intended it to mean the latter — or remove it from the presidential eligibility clause. THAT was no coincidence.

  16. Lew Harper   Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 9:13 AM

    “I told you before Lew. Yours is a losing argument.”

    Here is the thing – the case was argued on November 3rd, 2014 and the decision announced on June 8th, 2015. Between then, in March, 2015 Canadian-born Ted Cruz announced his run for the Presidency. That is not a coincidence.

    Justice Thomas could have simply said, ‘It has determined that children born abroad to U. S. parents, …are citizens who do not need to go through the naturalization process. 8 U. S. C. §§ 1401(c), (d), (g).’ but he chose to deliberately say “natural-born citizen”. He was clearly sending a message – ‘don’t waste your or the Court’s time on this eligibility issue as it is a losing argument.”

    Also too, he cited U. S. C. §§ 1401 (g) which is the situation that would cover both Cruz and Duckworth.

  17. Robert Christopher Laity   Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 5:22 AM

    Dennis Becker, Harris is NOT an NBC.

    Lew Harper, “Naturalization Law” does NOT and cannot confer Natural Born Citizenship on anyone. Naturalization Law makes citizens out of non-citizens, by statutory methods. A Natural Born Citizen cannot be made out of the naturalizing of a foreigner.

    In 1790 Congress made the same unconstitutional mistake that you have now also attributed to Justice Thomas. That is when they said that children of US Citizens born overseas were NBCs. They promptly REPEALED that designation as unconstitutional in 1795.

    Finally, the two parent requirement HAS already BEEN accepted by SCOTUS. It was by a 9-0 consensus that the court in Minor v Happersett said that NBCs were those born IN the United States to parents who were both US Citizens themselves.

    I told you before Lew. Yours is a losing argument. I too want the citation wherein you allege that Justice Thomas made such a statement., especially since it was HE who told Congressman Serano that the court was “Evading the issue”.

  18. Lew Harper   Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 12:53 AM

    Zivotofsky v. Kerry

    “It has determined that children born abroad to U. S. parents, subject to some exceptions, are natural-born citizens who do not need to go through the naturalization process. 8 U. S. C. §§ 1401(c), (d), (g).”

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/13-628.pdf

    Clearly Justice Thomas understands that citizenship at birth makes someone natural-born as they did not have to go through the naturalization process.

  19. Sharon Rondeau   Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 10:59 PM

    Source?

  20. Lew Harper   Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 10:23 PM

    In 2015 in a concurring opinion, Justice Thomas wrote that children born overseas to US citizen parents are “natural-born citizens”. He based that on US naturalization law which he said is grounded in the Constitution giving Congress the authority to make such laws.

    If Justice Thomas thinks that way it is clear the SCOTUS will never accept the two citizen parent theory.

  21. CDR Kerchner (Ret)   Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 2:42 PM

    I uploaded a day or so ago my new document to SCRIBD about Tammy Duckworth not being a natural born Citizen of the United States and thus not eligible to be VP or President. I made it public as I have all my prior uploads. I can see it in my ProtectOurLiberty upload account and list. But no one else can. The rest of the world see a NOTICE message … This document has been removed by Scribd. Try this direct SCRIBD link to the document: https://www.scribd.com/document/464130747/Tammy-Duckworth-Born-in-Thailand-Not-a-Natural-Born-Citizen-Constitutionally-Eligible-for-VP-or-President This is an example of shadow banning imo since I can see the document as the uploader and there is no statement saying my document violates any rules and has been removed. SCRIBD just refuses to let the world see it without directly telling the uploader that they are doing that. The throwing rocks in the paths and censorship and harassment by big media online of constitutional conservatives is getting more and more brazen and wider spread. SCRIBD must be added to the list of large media and tools (Google, Twitter, Facebook, PayPal etc.) that is engaging in censorship and shadow banning and harassment of conservative viewpoints. Congress should add SCRIBD to their list of targets to investigate for censoring conservative messages. The left can spread their words and message via these platforms unobstructed but constitutional conservatives cannot. We get rocks thrown in our path at every turn. Especially on the subject of constitutional eligibility to be Pres or VP, and natural born Citizen. CDR Kerchner (Ret) – http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

  22. Bob   Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 1:57 PM

    duckworth isn’t eligible but devilcrats don’t care, fuhrer Obama wasn’t eligible and they knew it.

  23. CDR Kerchner (Ret)   Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 12:11 PM

    More information about U.S. Senator Harris’ lack of constitutional eligibility, and some others, can be found here: https://www.scribd.com/lists/22182725/Some-Politicians-Seeking-High-Office-Who-Are-Not-A-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-U-S CDR Kerchner (Ret) – http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

  24. James Carter   Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 9:33 AM

    Kamala Harris is an anchor baby. Not only was she born to parents who were not U.S. citizens but, moreover, he was born to parents who were not even citizens of the same country and, therefore, she was born with allegiance to not one, not two, but three different countries.

  25. Sharon Rondeau   Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 7:09 AM

    What about her eligibility?

  26. Dennis Becker   Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 11:03 PM

    No worries as the most likely candidate for Biden’s VP pick is Senator Harris.

  27. Robert Laity   Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 7:10 PM

    Everyone here knows what I think about Duckworth. She is constitutionally BARRED from being President of the United States OR VP!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.