7 ms·

> The law in America forbids a foreign-born citizen from being president. This is incorrect. John McCain was born in a foreign country, but he was born to Amer

> The law in America forbids a foreign-born citizen from being president. This is incorrect. John McCain was born in a foreign country, but he was born to American citizen parents, which made him natural born anyway. Someone who was born to noncitizen parents, but born within the geographical US would also be considered natural born. The US definition of "natural born citizen" is a lot more flexible than what most countries will allow even for naturalized citizens.

ghaff 5y ago
Which was a mildly interesting law review topic pulling in various aspects of English common law and practices--although, had it became relevant, there is little doubt that "McCain isn't natural born" would have been widely seen as a fringe position.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  The Panama Canal Zone was under US administration when McCain was born, and he was on a US Naval base, so in some sense he was in US territory. The more interesting story is that of Ted Cruz, who had a noncitizen father and was born in Canada.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    "In some sense" is what gets interesting :-) But I agree that both fall into an interesting (if probably not ultimately very important) area of ambiguity in US constitutional law and common law.
    - mellavora 5y ago
      Not so ambiguous. Born on a US military base counts as US soil.
      - ghaff 5y ago
        No it is not: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/records-and-authentications/requesting-a-vital-record-as-a-u-s--citizen/faqs.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/records-and-authe... The arguments as I recall were basically two-fold: 1.) At the time, it was the Canal Zone (which wasn't quite US soil but maybe close enough) and 2.) There were some long-standing common law precedents related to agents of the king, diplomats, etc.
- jandrewrogers 5y ago
  US law has traditionally held that if both parents are US citizens then the child is a natural-born US citizen regardless of where in the world they are born. This was specifically in support of diplomats, military, etc. I am not aware of a context in which this wasn’t true. The only complicated area in law is when only a single parent is a US citizen and the child is born overseas. This was a consequence of the 20th century reality that the US had vast numbers of military personnel stationed globally.
  - redis_mlc 5y ago
    > US law has traditionally held that if both parents are US citizens then the child is a natural-born US citizen No, it just took one US parent in the late 90's to get a US passport (full US citizenship.) Don't know about 2021.
  - coolgeek 5y ago
    If either of your biological parents is an American citizen, you are automatically a natural born American citizen, regardless of where geographically you are born. This is why Obama, McCain and Ted Cruz are eligible for the Presidency edit: doh. Forgot that Obama was born in Hawaii

ghaff 5y ago

Which was a mildly interesting law review topic pulling in various aspects of English common law and practices--although, had it became relevant, there is little doubt that "McCain isn't natural born" would have been widely seen as a fringe position.

bobthepanda 5y ago
The Panama Canal Zone was under US administration when McCain was born, and he was on a US Naval base, so in some sense he was in US territory. The more interesting story is that of Ted Cruz, who had a noncitizen father and was born in Canada.
- ghaff 5y ago
  "In some sense" is what gets interesting :-) But I agree that both fall into an interesting (if probably not ultimately very important) area of ambiguity in US constitutional law and common law.
  - mellavora 5y ago
    Not so ambiguous. Born on a US military base counts as US soil.
    - ghaff 5y ago
      No it is not: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/records-and-authentications/requesting-a-vital-record-as-a-u-s--citizen/faqs.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/records-and-authe... The arguments as I recall were basically two-fold: 1.) At the time, it was the Canal Zone (which wasn't quite US soil but maybe close enough) and 2.) There were some long-standing common law precedents related to agents of the king, diplomats, etc.
jandrewrogers 5y ago
US law has traditionally held that if both parents are US citizens then the child is a natural-born US citizen regardless of where in the world they are born. This was specifically in support of diplomats, military, etc. I am not aware of a context in which this wasn’t true. The only complicated area in law is when only a single parent is a US citizen and the child is born overseas. This was a consequence of the 20th century reality that the US had vast numbers of military personnel stationed globally.
- redis_mlc 5y ago
  > US law has traditionally held that if both parents are US citizens then the child is a natural-born US citizen No, it just took one US parent in the late 90's to get a US passport (full US citizenship.) Don't know about 2021.
- coolgeek 5y ago
  If either of your biological parents is an American citizen, you are automatically a natural born American citizen, regardless of where geographically you are born. This is why Obama, McCain and Ted Cruz are eligible for the Presidency edit: doh. Forgot that Obama was born in Hawaii