McCain and "natural born"
Jul. 11th, 2008 07:39 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
libertangoFrom ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
jaylake comes this article in the New York Times re the issue of whether McCain is a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution requires, given that he was born in the Canal Zone in Panama. Key graf for me:
"The analysis, by Prof. Gabriel J. Chin, focused on a 1937 law that has been largely overlooked in the debate over Mr. McCain’s eligibility to be president. The law conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904, and it made John McCain a citizen just before his first birthday. But the law came too late, Professor Chin argued, to make Mr. McCain a natural-born citizen."
See, if he'd been born at an embassy or a consulate -- a place with extraterritoriality, to use the term of art -- I'd have no problem. But despite some diplomats' assertion that we stole the Canal Zone fair and square, this has bugged me. And now that a specific law has been found that conferred citizenship on people born in McCain's circumstances after the fact... I don't see how you can avoid the conclusion that until that law passed, he wasn't a citizen. (Nor were a number of other people.) Bulk naturalization is naturalization just the same.
The article goes on:
"“It’s preposterous that a technicality like this can make a difference in an advanced democracy,” Professor Chin said. “But this is the constitutional text that we have.”"
Indeed. Jay thinks this is a bogus point, but I think of it as fairness. Alexander Hamilton, notably, was disqualified from being president because of it, as he was born in Barbados. We've had too many exemptions from the Constitution for the sake of expediency in recent years.
I'll agree with Jay, though, "As with so many other issues-of-character and personal past by which Democrats are hung out to dry, it’s OK if you’re a Republican."
I don't see why we don't just start calling them "anti-Constitutionalists", like the old anti-Federalists.
UPDATED TO ADD: I made multiple Gross Factual Errors regarding Mr. Hamilton. I'll let them stand, as a reminder to keep myself humble.
jaylake comes this article in the New York Times re the issue of whether McCain is a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution requires, given that he was born in the Canal Zone in Panama. Key graf for me:"The analysis, by Prof. Gabriel J. Chin, focused on a 1937 law that has been largely overlooked in the debate over Mr. McCain’s eligibility to be president. The law conferred citizenship on children of American parents born in the Canal Zone after 1904, and it made John McCain a citizen just before his first birthday. But the law came too late, Professor Chin argued, to make Mr. McCain a natural-born citizen."
See, if he'd been born at an embassy or a consulate -- a place with extraterritoriality, to use the term of art -- I'd have no problem. But despite some diplomats' assertion that we stole the Canal Zone fair and square, this has bugged me. And now that a specific law has been found that conferred citizenship on people born in McCain's circumstances after the fact... I don't see how you can avoid the conclusion that until that law passed, he wasn't a citizen. (Nor were a number of other people.) Bulk naturalization is naturalization just the same.
The article goes on:
"“It’s preposterous that a technicality like this can make a difference in an advanced democracy,” Professor Chin said. “But this is the constitutional text that we have.”"
Indeed. Jay thinks this is a bogus point, but I think of it as fairness. Alexander Hamilton, notably, was disqualified from being president because of it, as he was born in Barbados. We've had too many exemptions from the Constitution for the sake of expediency in recent years.
I'll agree with Jay, though, "As with so many other issues-of-character and personal past by which Democrats are hung out to dry, it’s OK if you’re a Republican."
I don't see why we don't just start calling them "anti-Constitutionalists", like the old anti-Federalists.
UPDATED TO ADD: I made multiple Gross Factual Errors regarding Mr. Hamilton. I'll let them stand, as a reminder to keep myself humble.
