# If Goldwater Had Won The Presidency (A Question for the Legal Beagle Dopers) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 13, 2004, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588 "2004-11-13T19:28:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2004, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/1 "2004-11-13T19:28:15Z")
Okay, I remember watching some biography program on Goldwater, and at the end, they said that technically he was ineligible to be President since when he was born in Arizona, it was still a territory and not a state. I find it a little hard to believe that Goldwater would have been denied, but given some of the odd ways the Constitution has been interpreted in the past, anything’s possible. So, if he had won, could the Democrats have sued to block his election because of this? And how likely is it that the SCOTUS (since it would have ended up there, eventually) would have ruled that Goldwater was **not** eligible? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2004, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/2 "2004-11-13T19:38:23Z")
There’s no requirement that the president be born in a state…just that he be a natural born citizen of the US. So, Goldwater was eligibile. Somebody born in Puerto Rico is eligible. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2004, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/3 "2004-11-13T22:53:04Z")
The specific [requirements](http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html) for the office are > [@](#): > > 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 question is whether someone born in the Arizona Territory was a natural born citizen. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2004, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/4 "2004-11-13T22:59:09Z")
The Arizona Territory was as much a part of the United States as is the District of Columbia. Woiuld anyone argue that someone born in D.C. can’t be President? ---
**Author:** ![Sternvogel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bc79bd/32.png) [@Sternvogel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sternvogel)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2004, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/5 "2004-11-13T23:36:43Z")
Also, the first seven presidents (Washington, John Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Jackson) were born before the “United States” existed as such. Van Buren, the eighth president, was born in 1782 – after the Declaration of Independence (1776), but before the Constitution was ratified (1788). William Henry Harrison, Van Buren’s successor, was the last president born (1773) before the adoption of the Declaration. Tyler, the tenth president, was the first born (1790) after the Constitution had become the law of the land. Polk (#11) was born in 1795, but Taylor (#12) was born in 1784. Thus, the man inaugurated in 1849 could have been deemed “technically ineligible” by some quibblers. Nobody born in the Confederacy from 1861 to 1865 ever became president, and I’m not aware of any serious candidate who could have been tripped up by such circumstances. Furthermore, the U.S. Government never (IIRC) recognized any of the Southern states’ secessions, so the issue might never have come up anyway. During the 2000 primary season, there was some discussion of John McCain’s having been born in the (Panama) Canal Zone. Since his parents were citizens of the USA, and the Canal Zone was under U.S. jurisdiction at the time of John’s birth, the potential ineligibility of the Republican Senator from Arizona (interesting parallel to Goldwater) quickly became a non-issue. George Romney, who briefly campaigned for the Republican nomination in 1968, was born in the Mexican state of Chihuahua. Since his parents (Latter-Day Saints who had temporarily relocated before returning to the Idaho-Utah “Mormon belt”) were U.S. citizens, however, Romney was allowed to try for the White House. And then there’s the question of whether President Chester A. Arthur, officially a native Vermonter, may have been born in Quebec… ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2004, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/6 "2004-11-13T23:53:58Z")
A person born in Timbuktu to American parents is still a natural born citizen of the United States. Natural born does not mean “born only within the United States”. Natural born means a U.S. citizen from the moment of birth. From [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services](http://uscis.gov/graphics/services/natz/faq.htm#q2): > [@](#): > > **Who is born a United States citizen?** > > Generally, people are born U.S. citizens if they are born in the United States or if they are born to U.S. citizens: > > (1) _By being born in the United States_ > If you were born in the United States (including, in most cases, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands), you are an American citizen at birth (unless you were born to a foreign diplomat). Your birth certificate is proof of your citizenship. > > (2) _Through birth abroad to TWO United States citizens_ > In most cases, you are a U.S. citizen if ALL of the following are true: > • Both your parents were U.S. citizens when you were born; and > • At least one of your parents lived in the United States at some point in their life. > > (3) _Through birth abroad to ONE United States citizen_ > In most cases, you are a U.S. citizen if ALL of the following are true: > • One of your parents was a U.S. citizen when you were born; > • Your citizen parent lived at least 5 years in the United States before you were born; and > • At least 2 of these 5 years in the United States were after your citizen parent’s 14th birthday\* > > - If you were born before November 14, 1986, you are a citizen if your U.S. citizen parent lived in the United States for at least 10 years and 5 of those years in the United States were after your citizen parent’s 14th birthday. ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/7 "2004-11-14T01:09:37Z")
> [@Sternvogel](#): > > Also, the first seven presidents (Washington, John Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Jackson) were born before the “United States” existed as such. Van Buren, the eighth president, was born in 1782 – after the Declaration of Independence (1776), but before the Constitution was ratified (1788). William Henry Harrison, Van Buren’s successor, was the last president born (1773) before the adoption of the Declaration. Tyler, the tenth president, was the first born (1790) after the Constitution had become the law of the land. Polk (#11) was born in 1795, but Taylor (#12) was born in 1784. Thus, the man inaugurated in 1849 could have been deemed “technically ineligible” by some quibblers. But they were all citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. To repeat the prior quote: > [@](#): > > 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. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/8 "2004-11-14T02:12:49Z")
People (except members of sovereign Indian Nations) born in the Arizona Territory were U.S. Citizens. The treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo and the Organizing Act for the New Mexico Territory (which originally included Arizona) provided for that. And various versions of the Nationality Act passed ever since (the latest in the 1950s, since amended) also include the inhbitants of the Territories in the definition of “natural-born citizen”. The Hon. Barry Goldwater was born a U.S. citizen. So how come this question seems to be asked here once or twice every blessed year? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/9 "2004-11-14T02:19:07Z")
How about [Sidney Catts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_J._Catts), the former Governor of Florida and a major figure in the Prohibition Party? If he had decided to run for President back in the twenties, would he have faced a legal challenge for having been born in Alabama in 1863 (when that state had emphatically declared it was not part of the United States)? ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/10 "2004-11-14T02:34:30Z")
> [@Little Nemo](#): > > How about [Sidney Catts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_J._Catts), the former Governor of Florida and a major figure in the Prohibition Party? If he had decided to run for President back in the twenties, would he have faced a legal challenge for having been born in Alabama in 1863 (when that state had emphatically declared it was not part of the United States)? Not a supportable one - the United States never recognized the right of the Confederate states to secede. He was born in the United States, whatever Alabama was saying about it in 1863. ---
**Author:** ![Rillian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bcef8e/32.png) [@Rillian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rillian)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/11 "2004-11-14T03:28:16Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > A person born in Timbuktu to American parents is still a natural born citizen of the United States. Natural born does not mean “born only within the United States”. Natural born means a U.S. citizen from the moment of birth. Not necessarily true. Natural born is not defined in the Constitution and until a case is decided by the SCOTUS, we don’t know for certain what qualifies as “natural born.” ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/12 "2004-11-14T03:58:10Z")
> [@yabob](#): > > Not a supportable one - the United States never recognized the right of the Confederate states to secede. He was born in the United States, whatever Alabama was saying about it in 1863. Is that so clear cut? All of the states that seceded had to be re-admitted to the Union. If the US never recognized their secession, why did it have to re-admit them? ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/13 "2004-11-14T04:42:20Z")
> [@Tuckerfan](#): > > Okay, I remember watching some biography program on Goldwater, and at the end, they said that technically he was ineligible to be President since when he was born in Arizona, it was still a territory and not a state. I’d make a note to myself never to take anything that I ever heard on that program too seriously ever again. > [@](#): > > So, if he had won, could the Democrats have sued to block his election because of this? This is why the term “frivolous lawsuit” was invented. > [@](#): > > And how likely is it that the SCOTUS (since it would have ended up there, eventually) would have ruled that Goldwater was **not** eligible? Not likely at all, since the case would be thrown out by any self-respecting district court and SCOTUS would never grant cert. But if anyone really believes otherwise, they should keep their lawsuit papers handy and hope that John McCain gets elected President, because he was born in the Canal Zone. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/14 "2004-11-14T04:50:12Z")
> [@Rillian](#): > > Not necessarily true. Natural born is not defined in the Constitution and until a case is decided by the SCOTUS, we don’t know for certain what qualifies as “natural born.” I refer you to the [U.S. Code](http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401----000-.html). ---
**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/15 "2004-11-14T15:13:22Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > So how come this question seems to be asked here once or twice every blessed year? Why should this question be any different? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/16 "2004-11-14T15:25:34Z")
> [@barbitu8](#): > > Is that so clear cut? All of the states that seceded had to be re-admitted to the Union. If the US never recognized their secession, why did it have to re-admit them? I’m pretty sure that it is that clear cut, and southern states were not “re-admitted” to the Union, as they were never acknowedged to have laft. However, it was a widely held assumption even at the time. One of Lincoln’s senior generals after Gettysburg made a claim to the effect, “We have repulsed the invader from our land and forced them back to their own.” Lincoln supposedly despaired that the guy just didn’t get it – there is no “them”, there is only “us”, and “they” have no foreign soil to return to. . ---
**Author:** ![Rillian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bcef8e/32.png) [@Rillian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rillian)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/17 "2004-11-14T16:04:06Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > I refer you to the [U.S. Code](http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401----000-.html). **Walloon** , that link doesn’t mention “natural born”. It defines the meaning of the term “U.S. citizen” for the purposes of federal law. We’re talking about the definition of “natural born citizen” as a Consititutional requirement to be president. While that U.S. Code definition of citizen would certainly be relevant to SCOTUS when reviewing a case over the definition of “natural born”, it would not be binding. SCOTUS could decide that while the definition of citizen is fine for deciding who automatically gets a U.S. passport, etc., the framers meant for any president to have been born within a state of the United States, i.e. the requirements for president could be more restrictive than the citizenship law. Until someone brings a case or the Consitution is amended, we won’t know for sure. ---
**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/18 "2004-11-14T16:09:51Z")
> [@Boyo Jim](#): > > I’m pretty sure that it is that clear cut, and southern states were not “re-admitted” to the Union, as they were never acknowedged to have laft. However, it was a widely held assumption even at the time. Following the Civil War, the Union ruled the seceding states through military governments – first operating under direct Presidential authority, later under the Reconstruction Act of 1867 – which slowly organized civilian governments who held power at the occupying forces’ sufferance. Congress denied seats to senators and representatives from those states until they had complied with certain conditions – such as ratification of the 14th amendment – and been formally readmitted to statehood under the Reconstruction Act. Congress eventually did readmit each seceding state. From Eric Foner, _A Short History of Reconstruction_ (1990): > [@](#): > > Rejecting talk of “conquered provinces” or states reverting to territories, moderates [in the 39th Congress] adopted a constitutional position not unlike the President’s. While indesructible, the states had forfeited some of their rights by attempting secession; for the moment, they remained in the “grasp of war.” Johnson has used similar reasoning to appoint provisional governors and require states to ratify the Thirtenth Amendment. Moderates believed the same logic empowered Congress to withhold representation from the South until the essential rights of the freedmen had been guaranteed. Pp. 109-10. > [@](#): > > In its final form, the Reconstruction Act of 1867 divided the Confederate states, except Tennessee, into five military districts under commanders empowered to employ the Army to protect life and property. And without immediately replacing the Johnson regimes, it laid out the steps by which new state governments could be created and recognized by Congress – the writing of new constitutions providing for manhood suffrage, their approval by a majority of registered voters, and ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment… The bill established military rule, but only as a temporary measure to keep the peace, with the states assured a relatively quick return to the Union. P. 122. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/19 "2004-11-14T16:14:02Z")
> [@Rillian](#): > > **Walloon** , that link doesn’t mention “natural born”. 😕 **Huh** What part of > [@](#): > > The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth is ambiguous or open to interpretation? Unless we are being so anal about using the actual two words _“natural born”_ that we’re unwilling to recognize the use of what for almost 200 years has been the legally accepted _definition_ of “natural born citizen”. It’s hard to govern a society if we’re going to presume that we do not know what any Constitutional or statutory provision means unless SCotUS rules on it. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588/20 "2004-11-14T16:14:38Z")
On the Confederacy thing - also note that it is not required that somebody be born in an actual state to have US citizenship. It suffices to be born in territory belonging to the the US. Since the US never recognized the sovereignty of the Confederacy, and the area in question certainly didn’t belong to any third party at the time, it must have belonged to the US, whether Alabama’s status as a state was in some sort of limbo or not. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-goldwater-had-won-the-presidency-a-question-for-the-legal-beagle-dopers/274588.md?page=2)