See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: McCain’s Panama Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out
Source:
New York Times
URL Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/u ... &ref=politics&pagewanted=print
Published: Feb 28, 2008
Author: By CARL HULSE
Post Date: 2008-02-28 11:13:20 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 197
Comments: 11
WASHINGTON — The question has nagged at the parents of Americans born outside the continental United States for generations: Dare their children aspire to grow up and become president? In the case of Senator John McCain of Arizona, the issue is becoming more than a matter of parental daydreaming. Mr. McCain’s likely nomination as the Republican candidate for president and the happenstance of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the nation’s highest office. Almost since those words were written in 1787 with scant explanation, their precise meaning has been the stuff of confusion, law school review articles, whisper campaigns and civics class debates over whether only those delivered on American soil can be truly natural born. To date, no American to take the presidential oath has had an official birthplace outside the 50 states. “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.” Mr. McCain was born on a military installation in the Canal Zone, where his mother and father, a Navy officer, were stationed. His campaign advisers say they are comfortable that Mr. McCain meets the requirement and note that the question was researched for his first presidential bid in 1999 and reviewed again this time around. But given mounting interest, the campaign recently asked Theodore B. Olson, a former solicitor general now advising Mr. McCain, to prepare a detailed legal analysis. “I don’t have much doubt about it,” said Mr. Olson, who added, though, that he still needed to finish his research. Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and one of Mr. McCain’s closest allies, said it would be incomprehensible to him if the son of a military member born in a military station could not run for president. “He was posted there on orders from the United States government,” Mr. Graham said of Mr. McCain’s father. “If that becomes a problem, we need to tell every military family that your kid can’t be president if they take an overseas assignment.” The phrase “natural born” was in early drafts of the Constitution. Scholars say notes of the Constitutional Convention give away little of the intent of the framers. Its origin may be traced to a letter from John Jay to George Washington, with Jay suggesting that to prevent foreigners from becoming commander in chief, the Constitution needed to “declare expressly” that only a natural-born citizen could be president. Ms. Duggin and others who have explored the arcane subject in depth say legal argument and basic fairness may indeed be on the side of Mr. McCain, a longtime member of Congress from Arizona. But multiple experts and scholarly reviews say the issue has never been definitively resolved by either Congress or the Supreme Court. Ms. Duggin favors a constitutional amendment to settle the matter. Others have called on Congress to guarantee that Americans born outside the national boundaries can legitimately see themselves as potential contenders for the Oval Office. “They ought to have the same rights,” said Don Nickles, a former Republican senator from Oklahoma who in 2004 introduced legislation that would have established that children born abroad to American citizens could harbor presidential ambitions without a legal cloud over their hopes. “There is some ambiguity because there has never been a court case on what ‘natural-born citizen’ means.” Mr. McCain’s situation is different from those of the current governors of California and Michigan, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer M. Granholm, who were born in other countries and were first citizens of those nations, rendering them naturalized Americans ineligible under current interpretations. The conflict that could conceivably ensnare Mr. McCain goes more to the interpretation of “natural born” when weighed against intent and decades of immigration law. Mr. McCain is not the first person to find himself in these circumstances. The last Arizona Republican to be a presidential nominee, Barry Goldwater, faced the issue. He was born in the Arizona territory in 1909, three years before it became a state. But Goldwater did not win, and the view at the time was that since he was born in a continental territory that later became a state, he probably met the standard. It also surfaced in the 1968 candidacy of George Romney, who was born in Mexico, but again was not tested. The former Connecticut politician Lowell P. Weicker Jr., born in Paris, sought a legal analysis when considering the presidency, an aide said, and was assured he was eligible. Franklin D. Roosevelt Jr. was once viewed as a potential successor to his father, but was seen by some as ineligible since he had been born on Campobello Island in Canada. The 21st president, Chester A. Arthur, whose birthplace is Vermont, was rumored to have actually been born in Canada, prompting some to question his eligibility. Quickly recognizing confusion over the evolving nature of citizenship, the First Congress in 1790 passed a measure that did define children of citizens “born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States to be natural born.” But that law is still seen as potentially unconstitutional and was overtaken by subsequent legislation that omitted the “natural-born” phrase. Mr. McCain’s citizenship was established by statutes covering the offspring of Americans abroad and laws specific to the Canal Zone as Congress realized that Americans would be living and working in the area for extended periods. But whether he qualifies as natural-born has been a topic of Internet buzz for months, with some declaring him ineligible while others assert that he meets all the basic constitutional qualifications — a natural-born citizen at least 35 years of age with 14 years of residence. “I don’t think he has any problem whatsoever,” said Mr. Nickles, a McCain supporter. “But I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if somebody is going to try to make an issue out of it. If it goes to court, I think he will win.” Lawyers who have examined the topic say there is not just confusion about the provision itself, but uncertainty about who would have the legal standing to challenge a candidate on such grounds, what form a challenge could take and whether it would have to wait until after the election or could be made at any time. In a paper written 20 years ago for the Yale Law Journal on the natural-born enigma, Jill Pryor, now a lawyer in Atlanta, said that any legal challenge to a presidential candidate born outside national boundaries would be “unpredictable and unsatisfactory.” “If I were on the Supreme Court, I would decide for John McCain,” Ms. Pryor said in a recent interview. “But it is certainly not a frivolous issue.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Brian S (#0)
The same Mr. Olsen whose wife could not have possible made those telephone calls to him as he alleged from the "plane" that crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11/01. Well, I guess we can see where this is going.
BREAKING 9/11 NEWS: FBI Says Barbara Olsen Did Not Call Ted Olsen. Bush Solicitor General LIED !!
I was wondering if New Yorker John Jay wanted to prevent fellow New Yorker (but West Indies-born) Alexander Hamilton from becoming president. That would be odd, since they were political allies and associates in such things as the writing of the Federalist Papers. However, the constitutional provision in fact says, "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". So, Hamilton qualified. I wonder what the reason was for allowing people in America up to 1788 -- but no one coming in thereafter -- to become president.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
I read some little trivia article on the US presidents this past weekend. What surprised me was that the 8th president was the first natural born US president. Dang if I can remember his name.
Martin Van Buren, our eighth president, was born outside Albany NY in 1782. Which raises the interesting question: were people born in America between the Declaration of Independence and the adoption of the U.S. Constitution natural-born citizens of the United States? Under the Articles of Confederation, were people citizens of the United States, or only citizens of whatever state they were in? (I don't know.) Van Buren's predecessor and mentor, Andrew Jackson not only was born in America prior to independence (in NC in 1767), but actually fought in the American Revolution (and was held by the British as a prisoner of war). Van Buren's successor, William Henry Harrison, was also born before independence (in VA in 1773). He didn't join the Army until 1791 -- thus, well after the Revolution. Not until the 10th president, John Tyler, do we get to one that was born in America under the Constitution (in VA in 1790). (Tyler survived long enough, however, to serve briefly in the Confederate Congress before dying in 1862.)
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Here is a clarification of what I read in case I muddied the waters: 2. Martin Van Buren, the eighth president, serving from 1837 to 1841. www.suburbanchicagonews.c...business/799302,6_3_NA18_LAWTALK_S1.article
His position concerning Israel and Iraq disqualifies him from dog ownership AFAIConcerned.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Simas Kudirka was the illegitimate son of a woman born in Brooklyn, and he successfully claimed American citizenship despite being born behind the Iron Curtain. It doesn't really matter where one is born if one parent is American. One is entitled to claim US citizenship. This argument about McCain is silly. The founders never intended to strip foreign born Americans (our own ambassadors' kids for instance) of citizenship.
According to the ridiculous interpretation of some the son or daughter of our ambassador who was born overseas could not be president, but the child of the Chinese ambassador to the UN who was born in the US could be president?
McCain Not Eligible Covered By Cnn - Poll Now www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/american.morning/ Should all Americans, regardless of country of birth, be allowed to run for president? Yes 17% 122 No 83% 606 Total Votes: 728
www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=7619 RESOLUTION OPPOSING INELIGIBLE CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
“I don’t have much doubt about it,” said Mr. Olson, (former solicitor general now advising Mr. McCain), who added, though, that he still needed to finish his research.
#2. To: All (#1)
#3. To: Brian S (#0)
The phrase “natural born” was in early drafts of the Constitution. Scholars say notes of the Constitutional Convention give away little of the intent of the framers. Its origin may be traced to a letter from John Jay to George Washington, with Jay suggesting that to prevent foreigners from becoming commander in chief, the Constitution needed to “declare expressly” that only a natural-born citizen could be president.
#4. To: aristeides (#3)
#5. To: Fred Mertz (#4)
#6. To: aristeides (#5)
2. Who was the first president born after the Declaration of Independence was signed and the first president born as a U.S. citizen?
#7. To: angle (#1)
#8. To: Brian S (#0)
#9. To: Fred Mertz (#4)
#10. To: Brian S (#0)
#11. To: Fred Mertz (#6)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest