Comment: You are correct

(See in situ)


You are correct

At least according to my understanding. The problem is that Natural born is not defined in US law as far as I have ever seen. The definitions I have seen all stem from english common law which is the contemporary basis of the constitution. Even that has several differing interpretations, however, the way I understand it you must either be born on US (country in question) soil with at least ONE citizen parent, or you could be born anywhere with TWO citizen parents. A more stringent example says both parents must be citizens, and you must be on US soil, but that one seems to not have been widely used at the time. At any rate, you cannot have two foreign nationals as parents and be considered natural born. On the other hand I could see an exception for foreign nationals living under asylum who are undergoing the naturalization process. The point is really thet you should have no allegiance to any foreign power, in Rubios case I think you could argue that effectively. You might argue the same for Obama except it would be hindered by spending a large part of his formative years on foreign soil, and by his father never even attempting to get US citizenship.

Josh Brueggen
Engineer
Entrepreneur
Gardener
Jack of all Trades
Precinct Commiteeman Precinct 5 Rock Island Co Illinois