For all lower offices are not “legal citizen, registered to vote” the only qualifications?
I think if you can be elected to a public office in your hometown, you should be able to move all the way up to the U.S. Presidency.
Any citizen over the age of majority should be able to run for President. I don’t see why a naturalized citizen is any different from one who was born a citizen. My children both became citizens when they were less than three years old - how are they different from my niece or nephew who were born citizens?
Fair warning - I think my daughter intends to skip President and go straight to World Dictator.
Be afraid - be very afraid.
Regards,
Shodan
What makes a natural born citizen so special anyway? You didn’t do anything to get to this country. You were literally just lucky enough to be born here.
My parents packed me up when I was five and brought me over seas. By the time I was 8 I had citizenship. I consider this as my country. I love India but if India and the US went to war for some reason there isn’t even a question of which side I’d be on - sorry, Mother India.
I think it should be removed, obviously, and a residency and length of citizenship clause put in. But what do I know?
A lot, as far as I’m concerned.
As a rule I’m not a big fan of amending the Constitution willy-nilly, but I would probably vote in favor of dropping this restriction along with strengthening the residency requirements.
I see the value the rule had in the 1790s, but I don’t see any legitimate argument against naturalized citizens or internationally adopted babies running for president. As if anyone would vote for a baby!
Really? How did that work? (I’m asking because I’m interested, and pretty ignorant about the whole thing. Not because I have any sort of agenda or am trying to interrogate you.) I thought that you needed to live in the US for 10 years before you were even eligible for naturalization, and that minors (obviously) can’t apply for naturalization. Googling…
So, the USCIS says that you need to have lived in the US 5 years (and meet other requirements) or 3 years if your spouse is a US citizen. It also says that you may already be a citizen if your parents become US citizens before you turned 18. 'Mika, I’m guessing this is how it worked for you?
I have a friend who’s parents emigrated here from Poland when she was 3. (She’s now a US citizen.) Once she made an offhand comment about finally being able to vote, so I guess I thought that she wasn’t a citizen until just earlier and had been naturalized. That doesn’t seem correct now, really (but I’ve no idea whether her parents are now or have ever been naturalized). Interesting.
I learned something today.
My parents, my wife, and my sister-in-law are all immigrants. They all worked damn hard to get here and worked damn hard to make careers and lives for themselves. My brother and I were born lucky as citizens and haven’t had to face nearly the same amount of hardship that they all did. I’d say that at the very least they’ve earned the moral right to be treated exactly as well as I am by the constitution. Anyone who harbours even the slightest notion that any of them should be looked upon with suspicion – suspicion that any natural born citizen is not subject to – based solely on their places of birth would be a fool of the first order.
That is what it means. A person to whom the rights and status of citizenship are natural (inherent) by the terms of their birth.
There are age requirements for both houses of Congress (25 for the House and 30 for the Senate). Quite a few states also have age requirements for varying offices.
Well, of course you would “see” it that way. The whole point of this rule was to keep you nasty Brits from sneaking in one of your own and taking over what you persisted in claiming were “the colonies” in this underhanded fashion!
So you’ve waited over two hundred years to arrange this takeover. Well, we’re still preventing you from doing it!
…
Seriously folks, this was the whole reason behind this silly rule in the first place. Don’t you think it’s time we got over that fear? I mean, Kenya? What are they going to do overrun us with?
I’d support dropping the “Natural Born” requirement and instead requiring that the person be a US Citizen for a minimum of 35 years.
Which of the nine justices are you? I’m betting you’re Breyer – he always stuck me as a Sparky kind of guy.
The phrase “natural born citizen” feels like it would contain some weird loophole like “none of woman born shall harm Macbeth.”
If a person of dual U.S. and other citizenship can become president, then it’s hard to see why a person who wasn’t born a citizen can’t be. Their loyalties are just as likely or unlikely to be pulled.
Well, that’s because Ohio isn’t really a state (according to the tax protesters, anyway). Those of us born in real states have plenty of super secret American essence. It shows up on x-rays.
I don’t care, which is strange, given all of the other things of even less importance that I do care about. I would never bother to try to change the requirement nor would I complain if it were changed.
I find myself at odds with you on a number of issues, and so I’m always surprised when we agree on things (and agree for exactly the same reasons).
This is one of those issues where I’m in complete agreement with you.
35 years seems a little steep, but I’d prefer it over the current rule. I’d say 20 years would be reasonable, or perhaps 14 since it goes along with the residency requirements.
Benevolent or Despotic?
It matters.
Thirty-five years of citizenship keeps the current rule in a sense. Birthright citizens have met the standard of 35 years of citizenship on their 35th birthday (their current qualification); making 35 years of citizenship the only standard allows naturalized citizens to compete on the basis of a uniform standard while still excluding those who haven’t made pretty much a life commitment.
The original intent of the provision was clearly suspicion, but there is always a clear distinction between birthright citizenship and naturalized citizens.
Natural born citizens are not only eligible for the Presidency, they are also not required to pass the citizenship test, and retain their right to immediate restoration of citizenship if they renounce it.
Naturalized citizens don’t have any of those benefits. It’s not just about being President. Is it unfair? Arguably, but not really. It’s just how the world works (not just the US).
Bear in mind that immigrants have a right that those born in the US may not- to become heads of government/state of the states they emigrated from. In your parents’ and sister’s case, that would be India, if I recall correctly, so it doesn’t apply*.
*The President of India (head of state, not head of government, and largely ceremonial) must have been a citizen for 35 years- remarkably close to spark240’s proposed fix. The Prime Minister (head of government) need only be a citizen.