Kamala Harris is not qualified to be the Vice-President of the United States
Gary Hunt, Outpost of Freedom
November 14, 2020
Though many cite “residence” as a birthright citizenship, if born in the United States, as per the 14th Amendment,(1868), they are only presumptive. The 14th Amendment states, in Section 1.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside…“
Not quite clear, however, can a newborn baby reside? Or must we refer to the parent? The newborn baby having no residence except in the womb, is, or must be, resident with the parent.
Donald Jasper Harris and his wife were not residents, rather transient in that he was a student. Whether in dormitory or an apartment, at best, the abode was temporary.
What is the legal definition of residing? From the Internet:
“Reside Law and Legal Definition. Reside means to dwell permanently or continuously. It expresses an idea that a person keeps or returns to a particular dwelling place as his fixed, settled, or legal abode. The plain meaning of reside implies a continuous arrangement.”
As explanatory. I was residing in Rolling Hills, California, when I entered the US Army. I had my abode in many places, including foreign countries. When I returned, I returned to Rolling Hills, my “residence”. However, to register to vote, I had to prove my residence as being in Rolling Hills, prior to military service, to satisfy the then requirement for voting, a “residence”, or permanent home.
Now, let’s look at the Constitution and requirements for office.
The House of Representatives requires that one must be “seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and (in rather confusing language, but germane) who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen. Art. I, Section 2, clause 2
The Senate requires that one must be “7 Years a Citizen of the United States, and (in rather confusing language, but germane) who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen. Art. I, Section 3, clause 3
The rather confusing portion of each is reference to “inhabitant”, as opposed to resident. Going a bit further, it requires that they be a “Citizen of the United States”. That would require that they be a citizen of one of the member states of the Union. This predates the subsequent reference of “United States Citizen”, which came into usage (became a status) with the 14th Amendment. Rather ironically, from a legal standpoint, the latter does not supersede the former, as it never explicitly referenced a change to the former.
In another reference to the Constitution, in Article II, Section 1, clause 2 ,to wit”:
The House of Representatives requires that one must be “seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and (in rather confusing language, but germane) who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen. Art. I, Section 1, clause 3, to wit:
” The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.”
Not that it is not citizenship be requires a special form of citizenship.
Subsequent amendments, 12, 20, and 22, do not affect the requirement that applies to the “natural born Citizen, as required by Article II, Section 1, clause 5, which say, “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…”
Not that it is not citizenship be requires a special form of citizenship.
So, the question arises as to whether Kamala Harris even meets the requisite “natural born Citizen”, which was defined in clause 5, since clause 3 requires those who would be President or Vice-President would both require “natural born Citizen” status.
Let’s look at what was meant (original intent) of the particular form of citizenship.
Article I, Section 2, clause
“No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.”
“seven Years a Citizen of the United States”
However, the requirements for the office of President have a higher standard.
Article II, Section 1, clause 5:
“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.”
“a natural born Citizen”
So we have “seven years a Citizen… at the time of the adoption of the Constitution” and “natural born Citizen”. What is the difference? We can look to the Supreme Court to find that answer.
MINOR v. HAPPERSETT, 88 U.S. 162 (1874)
“Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization Congress, as early as 1790, provided ‘that any alien, being a free white person,’ might be admitted as a citizen of the United States, and that the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under twenty-one years of age at the time of such naturalization, should also be considered citizens of the United States, and that the children of citizens of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens. These provisions thus enacted have, in substance, been retained in all the naturalization laws adopted since. In 1855, however, the last provision was somewhat extended, and all persons theretofore born or thereafter to be born out of the limits of the jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were, or should be at the time of their birth, citizens of the United States, were declared to be citizens.”
Now, if we consider the above, what would there be two distinct classes of citizen? It can only mean that, in a sense, there is a common meaning to citizen and naturalized citizen, the requirements for Congress, not for the presidency. However, when both parents are citizen, that their offspring is a natural BORN citizen, and that neither parent had allegiance to any other government as a citizen thereof. Otherwise, Anchor Babies would qualify, though Alexander Hamilton did not, to become President.
Since the subsequent amendments made no change to the original requirement of “Natural Born Citizens”, clearly. Kamala Harris, unless she can prove parental citizenship in the United States, at her birth, he is not qualified to serve as the Vice President of the United States.
And, Joe Biden must, when he takes the required oath of office (Article II, Section 1, clause 8):
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Will either have to denounce Kamala Harris as Vice President or violate the oath he must take to assume office, to “preserve, protect and defend”, proving that he has not the “Ability” to do so.
A PDF can be found at www.outpost-of-freedom.com/Kamala_Iver_Harris-VicePresident.pdf