by Sharon Rondeau
.jpg){kind=link}
(Jun. 3, 2023) — On Fox News’s Friday edition of “The Five,” speaking to the 2024 presidential election, guest co-host and former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway cited the constitutional requirements for the nation’s chief executive to be “35 years old” and a “U.S. citizen.”
“The Five” airs at 5:00 p.m. ET every weeknight, with segments available on YouTube after broadcast; as of press time, the episode is not yet posted.
Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires that:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The meaning of the term “natural born Citizen,” reserved only for the presidency (and later, by the Twelfth Amendment, for the vice-presidency as well) has been a matter of debate for decades, with no ruling on point issued by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Since 2007, a number of close observers have noted the conflation of the terms “U.S. citizen” or “citizen” and “natural born Citizen” by the media, political commentators, respected legal scholars, politicians and their aides, and consequently uninformed members of the public.
In contrast, Article I of the Constitution states the requirements for members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, respectively, as:
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
and:
No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.
The media’s lack of distinction in terms, along with the political class and an education system increasingly devoid of the teaching of civics, the Constitution, Bill of Rights and founding documents, has contributed to most Americans believing that a “U.S. citizen” or “born in the U.S.” is equivalent to “natural born Citizen.”
On July 25, 1787, as delegates to the constitutional convention met in Philadelphia, future first U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay wrote to convention chairman Gen. George Washington:
Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolved on, any but a natural born Citizen.
As noted by legal scholar and researcher Joseph DeMaio, a “Committee on Postponed Matters” “was charged with tackling some of the more difficult questions facing the convention delegates. One of those questions involved what qualifications, if any, were to be put in place regarding the Commander-in-Chief, ultimately to be labeled the ‘President.’ Whereas originally it had been proposed that the president need only be a ‘citizen’ subject to an age and residency requirement, in its Second Report to the Convention, delivered on September 4, 1787 by Chairman Brearley, the ‘natural born Citizen’ (“nbC”) restriction and ‘citizen grandfather clause’ exception was recommended by the Committee for insertion into the final draft of the Constitution.”
Under DeMaio and others’ definition of “natural born Citizen,” which rests on the writings of 18th-century philosopher and Swiss scholar Emmerich de Vattel, the president, or any presidential candidate, must have been born in the United States to parents who were themselves U.S. citizens at the time, whether through naturalization or birth in the United States.
With that in mind, the definition contends, the “citizen grandfather clause” allowed the Framers, who were born overseas or in the United States but to British-subject parents, to serve as president until a “natural born Citizen” came of age.
Despite its “evasion” of the “natural born Citizen” question, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2019 acknowledged Vattel as “the founding era’s foremost expert on the law of nations.” Two years later, Vattel’s 1758 flagship treatise, “The Law of Nations,” became a news headline when it was discovered that on October 5, 1789, first president George Washington borrowed it from the New York Society Library and never returned it.
Others claim a “natural born Citizen” is one born on U.S. soil without regard to the parents’ citizenship or to a single U.S.-citizen parent born inside or outside U.S. borders.
Whether or not Conway realized her misstatement of the presidential eligibility term was not apparent in the remainder of the broadcast.
Media—or anyone else—manipulating the terms of the constitution does not change the language or the applicability of the law.
Me, I would have extended the “Natural Born” requirement to not only the POTUS and Veep, but also require it of any cabinet appointees, PLUS the SENATE. Since the Senate, representing the several states on an equal basis, has more “checks and balances” over the Executive Branch (ability to confirm or deny Presidential appointments, approve treaties with foreign entities, and try either members of the Executive Branch (including, of course, the President himself) or the Judiciary after impeachment by the House and remove them on a 2/3 vote), it should be obvious why no “foreign” influences should readily be able to get to the highest levels of the Federal Government.
This, of course, calls into question the Korrupt Kenyan Kandidate, our 44th “POTUS”, though the resolution of his questionable citizenship status has been stonewalled. Suffice it that LEGALLY he might just be a citizen, thanks to the legal principle of estoppel, that is, a FRAUD perpetrated by his father, to stay in this country on a student VISA, is likely what got the baby Barrack to our shores in the first place, and circumvented any lawful process to make him a citizen. They could not have foreseen his destiny, nor did Barrack have any hand in that act of immigration fraud. Of course, everything that came forth from our 44th “POTUS” was of itself an outright fraud. And whether or not you’d have agreed with his politics, ask yourself this: why in the he** would we entrust the highest office in the land, and the most powerful one in the WORLD, to some obscure “community organizer”, who never held any actual remunerative job, even in his chosen profession as an attorney, i.e., with what law firms, or DA’s office did he ever work? Then, magically installed as the junior senator from Illinois by the same Chicago Democratic Party machine, after not even two years in office, he’s qualified to be POTUS? Folks, that ALONE should have been reason at the time to reject him, save that the likely alternative was the disgusting HRC…
July 25, 1787- John Jay sends letter to George Washington hinting that any U.S. President must be a “natural born citizen”:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-05-02-0251
July 25, 1788- John Jay successfully secures affirmative vote from New York state U.S. Constitution ratification convention to require all future U.S. Presidents, U.S. Vice Presidents, U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives to be freeholder/land owners and natural born citizens:
https://dlc.library.columbia.edu/jay/jay_constitution >>>
“…Toward the very end of the ratifying convention, on July 25th, Jay himself proposed an amendment barring all except “natural born citizens,” who were freeholders as well (with some specified exceptions) from eligibility as President, Vice President, or as members of either house of Congress, a restriction even more severe than that which he had proposed to Washington in July of 1787.”
SO DID U.S. SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS JR (i.e., leave out natural born)! Only trouble is, when he did it, a dangerous and unconstitutional precedent likely was set. Is this guy really going to be part of our highest court for life? GET USED TO THE NEW WOKE CONSTITUTION AND SYSTEM OF JUSTICE (social justice)! Maybe the court will define for us what a woman is! Or, what the difference is between gender and sex! Or, where Barack Hussein Obama himself/herself fits into all of this (a rhetorical question on my part)! Sorry about the double posts. AMEN.
SO DID U.S. SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN G ROBERTS JR! Unfortunately for America and its constitutional republic, Roberts established what looks to be a destructive and dangerous precedent for our country or what’s left of it. Is this guy “serving” on our highest court for a lifetime!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kellyanne_Conway
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin
Any degreed and licensed and practicing attorney who refuses to discuss “natural born Citizen” (nbC) eligibility is an “attorney-criminal” worthy of “re-education” on The Post & Email website to embrace First Chief Justice John Jay’s 1787-to-1789-intentions of his nbC-cause-clause, and if they choose, instead, to summarily dismiss said “re-education” herein, and remain a defiant non-compliant unaccounted licensed-to-lie attorney-criminal, THEY MAKE THEMSELVES CANDIDATES FOR THE GALLOWS for practicing treason and defiantly foisting “nbC-treason” on the trusting lay public.
DISBAR unaccounted state-licensed attorney-criminals “Joke (Joe) and Coke (hunted Hunter)” Biden, et al,
OR ELSE,
DISBAND unaccounted attorney-criminal licensing Boards
Attorneys are to zealously defend the U.S. Constitution;
attorney-criminals choose to jealously defend nbC-prostitution
SAVE AMERICA: DISBAR and DISBAND the national syndication (aka “sindication”) of nbC-attorney-criminals
Want to hear something bizarre?
Obama is being suggested to replace Kamala Harris as Biden’s running mate in 2024.
This really got my dander up. I’m already having discussions on twitter about why THAT suggestion is wholly unconstitutional on its face. Not to mention that Obama never was eligible to BE President, never was the bona-fide President and never can be.
https://themessenger.com/opinion/bidens-2024-hail-mary-name-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate
If you look at old dictionaries, the term “natural” used to include “the absence of foreign, as in Natural Born” as definition.
It is not much of a stretch to assume they meant foreign birth AND foreign parentage due to the absence of the word “except”…as in “except when you were born to a single American mother and foreign father” or “except when you were born in Canada and naturalized before anybody noticed”….sheesh!
Posted to her via Twitter: @KellyannePolls After saying what you said about presidential eligibility on The Five https://www.thepostemail.com/2023/06/03/conway-leaves-out-natural-born/ you obviously need a constitutional education update and need to read my new book http://www.kerchner.com/books/naturalborncitizen.htm CDR Kerchner (Ret)
Don’t call The “not so” Great One and Constitutional “expert” Mark Levin for clarification. He was a never Trumper and fought hard for the Cubanadian to be the GOP nominee…even married TC’s campaign manager I understand…
I and another patriot friend approached and met Levin briefly at a large conservative group conference held in Washington DC about 13 years ago. We handed him a packet of material we had accumulated to present to various attendees at this conference back then about the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause and in particular the Minor vs Happersett (1875) SCOTUS decision was pointed out to him and what that decision stated as clearly and without any doubt. He pleaded his being in a hurry to us at that time and that he was not familiar with that SCOTUS case and that he would read it and study it and the other information we gave him and get back to us. We never heard from him. And of course Levin was famous for shouting down anyone who called into his radio show to discuss/debate the nbC term with him over the many years since then.
Mark Levin was obviously in on the fix to get the true original intent, meaning, understanding, and purpose of the “natural born Citizen” national security term in the presidential eligibility clause pushed out of the way by the Republican Party so they could run a large stable of “politically attractive” candidates who were not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States and who were born with dual or triple citizenship and innate foreign influence and allegiances at and by birth.
More have surfaced these days. But here is a list of some touted from both major parties that I compiled several years ago: https://www.scribd.com/lists/22182725/Some-Politicians-Seeking-High-Office-Who-Are-Not-A-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-U-S
I’ll do some more hard data research in the next 6 months to get the needed hard evidence due to their evasive tactics in not answering direct questions and probably have to update that list over the next 6 months in prep for the 2024 election cycle, as more and more surface who had either no U.S. Citizen parents when they were born in the USA, or only one … and depending on which ones get enough traction to be qualified to be considered for the debates.
As my recent article suggested the SF-86 form should be a mandatory requirement by the FEC to be filed just like the financial disclosure form 278e is required now of all Presidential and VP candidates. We need more public transparency and disclosure not less for those seeking the highest political offices in our form of government. See this article: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2023/05/07/transparency-requirements-for-candidates-for-president-and-vice-president-more-is-needed-in-our-modern-electoral-process-filing-the-oge-financial-disclosure-form-278e-is-mandatory-the-opm-na/
CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org
http://www.kerchner.com/books/naturalborncitizen.htm
Don’t forget I had repeated conversations with Levin’s radio producers on behalf of Mario Apuzzo and myself to debate the issue. Crickets from Mark even though he publicly stated that he would entertain reasonable arguments on air. He never did of course. Levin and his buddy Cruz fancy themselves as constitutional experts but twist and contort the eligibility clause when it suits their needs.
I’m immensely encouraged by Trump declaring to end birthright citizenship in the US when he is back in office.
Of course he is right to do so and will set the course for widespread awareness (pray!) Additionally, in his final term, Trump won’t have to ride the brakes on the Obama BC issue.
That alone is worth the price of admission.
I had tagged Levin in Facebook posts and emails. His response to me was to tell his fans to “ignore the idiot birthers” and block me from posting information on his page. I was also targeted by his loyal fans for verbal abuse for my posts. Some fun.
I go in his chat room now to stir the pot. You should be there too. You too Gary.
Sharon I saw that but I’m not surprised if you know there’s no one in Barry Soetoro administration ever referred to him as a natural born citizen because they knew that was a Rubicon that would be too much to cross they always referred to him as a US citizen as if that was simply the eligibility requirement.