falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4605 times:
All this "birther" talk on this forum got me thinking. What if Obama really wasn't born in the USA? What would happen? I don't want this thread to turn into why you think the birthers are stupid or why you think they are correct. I just want your opinion on what you think would happen. Also lets say he completes his term in office and is found out to be born elsewhere. What would happen?
What do I think would happen? I think that if he were still in office he would have to leave office and the VP would have to be sworn in as President. It would be interesting because this would never have happened before and there really isn't a mechanism in place to remove a president for not being a natural born citizen. If he was out of office I really don't know what would happen, but there would be an effort to get every law he signed overturned and every appointee thrown out. One thing I know for sure is that it would be a mess and I don't want to be around if it happens.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19719 posts, RR: 56 Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4587 times:
Quoting falstaff (Thread starter): If he was out of office I really don't know what would happen, but there would be an effort to get every law he signed overturned and every appointee thrown out.
Biden would likely sign each of those laws, making that irrelevant. As for appointees, that would be tough, since they'd have to be re-appointed and approved by the new senate. And you can be sure that some of them wouldn't make it through.
It would definitely be a mess - fortunately we don't have to worry about it, since his eligibility has been confirmed numerous times.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
stlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8981 posts, RR: 27 Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4581 times:
to this day there is still speculation among historians that Chester Arthur was born in Canada.
Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
jetBlueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2021 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4561 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Although he was born in the US it would be interesting. I would assume he would immediately be removed from office. I guess that would mean Vice President Biden would be president. As for his policies becoming void I think that would be a tough subject and left up to the courts.
Blue
Professor Foltz: You push down on that yolk, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yolk, the houses get bigger.
falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4557 times:
Quoting stlgph (Reply 3): to this day there is still speculation among historians that Chester Arthur was born in Canada.
falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4531 times:
Quoting jetBlueguy22 (Reply 4): I would assume he would immediately be removed from office
That is what I figure, but I wonder how it would happen. Would there have to be an act of congress? Who would enforce the law?
I think this issue will show its head again in the future with another president. We have a lot of immigrants in the USA (always have) and question will come up again. This issue sort of came up with McCain too. There were some that said that because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone that disqualified him for President.
My parents neighbors have two children adopted from Kazakhstan. Those kids were born in Kazakhstan and when they were 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 they came to the USA. They were supposedly US citizens the moment they touched down in the USA (that is what the parents told me). One day in the future they may want to run for president. How easy would it be to prove they weren't born in this country? The paperwork on their birth in Kazakhstan may be non existent or impossible to locate in another 40 years or so. A lot of people could easily assume they are natural born Americans, they are white with blonde hair and blue eyes. A situation like that would even take the race card out the question too.
jetBlueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2021 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4525 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting falstaff (Reply 6): That is what I figure, but I wonder how it would happen. Would there have to be an act of congress? Who would enforce the law?
I think it would be the Supreme Court. They would probably declare the presidency unconstitutional and he would be removed. I wouldn't think they would need impeachment proceedings. Though with how the government works you never know!
Blue
Professor Foltz: You push down on that yolk, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yolk, the houses get bigger.
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4517 times:
Considering this is merely an academic discussion, I'll chime in.
Frankly, I believe the point would be moot. His mother was a United States citizen, and considering he did not renounce his citizenship at the age of 18 to claim citizenship of whatever other country he was supposedly born in, he is by all intents and purposes a natural-born US citizen.
The issue would be fast tracked to the Supreme Court, who would hopefully quickly (and unanimously) decide in his favor (thereby averting a constitutional crisis), and everything would go back to normal.
It would be a different story if he was born to two non-US citizens and then brought in country after his birth, but since his mother was a citizen and he was raised by citizens in country, it shouldn't make a difference at all.
Then, hopefully Congress would pass a law that said people born outside of the United States but who have been full fledged citizens of this country a certain percentage of their life (75 percent?) would be elligible to run for president.
falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4484 times:
Quoting planespotting (Reply 9): Then, hopefully Congress would pass a law that said people born outside of the United States but who have been full fledged citizens of this country a certain percentage of their life (75 percent?) would be elligible to run for president.
It would have to more than a law it would have be an amendment to the constitution.
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6203 posts, RR: 43 Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4418 times:
What if John McCain had been elected ? He certainly wasn't born in the USA.
What is it with all the "is there a possibilty airline X will.." threads? The answer it'll is possible.
jetBlueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2021 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4406 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting IMissPiedmont (Reply 18): What if John McCain had been elected ? He certainly wasn't born in the USA
Yes but he was born in a US territory to US parents. Obama was born to a US mother so it wouldn't matter anyway.
Blue
[Edited 2010-12-31 06:00:14 by srbmod]
Professor Foltz: You push down on that yolk, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yolk, the houses get bigger.
falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4350 times:
Here is an interesting article fron the New York Times from a few years ago. It seems this issue has been on the table before and I am sure we will see it again in the future.
ER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2232 posts, RR: 8 Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4321 times:
Quoting falstaff (Reply 5): All of our lives can change because of an event out of our control. My life changed because of the Union Carbide plant explosion in India.
So true - the entire course of my life changed due to an off-hand comment from a casual aquaintance that got me to change jobs many, many years ago. What ifs are definitely fun. All of the ones you list would make interesting topics.
Quoting falstaff (Reply 11): It would have to more than a law it would have be an amendment to the constitution.
I think it's inevitable that the day will come when such an amendment passes. There are more and more immigrants becoming citizens, and sooner or later the population as a whole will come to the realization that some of them would be perfectly qualified to lead the nation.
planeguy727 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1067 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4277 times:
I looked into this idea with some research at the US Constitution Center in Philadelphia (pre-Obama for the record - in fact he was not even a Senator yet). I did the research because I was not born on US territory, but I was a US citizen by birth (both parents born in the US -naturally born citizens- and my father was working at a US Embassy in another country). According to what I could find, I would be eligible to be elected and serve because I was a naturally born US citizen; but, the constitutional scholars also said that this type of situation would likely end up in the courts since it was not in a US territory (natural born potentially interpreted by some as only on US controlled soil) and someone would likely object (even if just a political effort to keep someone off the ballot).
The day will come that someone born a US citizen by not in the 50 states or a US controlled territory runs for POTUS.
falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4226 times:
Quoting falstaff (Reply 20): Here is an interesting article fron the New York Times from a few years ago. It seems this issue has been on the table before and I am sure we will see it again in the future.
exFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9 Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4215 times:
Quoting IMissPiedmont (Reply 18): What if John McCain had been elected ? He certainly wasn't born in the USA.
Actually, he was - although there was some question as to the status of persons born in the Canal Zone, this was cleared up by an act of Congress in 1937 (codified in 8 USC 1403) which applied retroactively, granting "statutory and declaratory born citizenship" to those born to at least one US citizen in the Canal Zone.
glydrflyr From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 207 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4173 times:
This hypotherical question, which is in two parts, is very interesting from several perspectives.
First, if the sitting President were inarguably found to have been born in another sovereign county, he would probably be immeditely impeached on "high crimes and misdemeanors" grounds. Unfortunately, the founders did not specify what these infractions consisted of, but certainly something as egreious as falsifying, or submitting false affadavits of birth would qualify. Congress conducts impeachment hearings, and if found guilty, Congress has the power, right, authority and obligation to order the removal of the President. Any and all laws he signed would be null and void, at least until resigned by the replacement President. The further along in the term such an action takes place, the messier it would be, and certainly both houses of Congress and the entire Federal Judiciary would be involved. All of the foregoing assumes that this misconduct is discovered while the Pres is in office.
If the issue comes to light after completion of a term, the laws would again be nullified and voided, until and if re-signed by the new Pres., but the ex-Pres. probably could not stand for impeachment in Congress, as he is now a private citizen.
In either case cited above, the battle would be monumental and possibly rage on for years as the pro and con groups affected by the laws have their say. Inevitably, some of the laws would not survive.
There is yet another scenario I have not seen mentioned or considered on this thread of HYPOTHETICAL issues.
Hypothetically, the Pres. refuses to step down, and a constiutional crisis erupts, now what?
The Federal Government is the creation of the states, and the states, to this day, reserve the right to declare null and void any laws that Congress passes that the State deems unconstitutional. Using this power, the states, individually or collectively, would declare any laws signed by the usurper to be null and void and unenforceable in each state electing to take this route. Witness, for example, the actions in Virginia where a Federal Court found certain provisions of the healthcare bill to be unconstitutional. In all, there twenty other state with similar suits now before other Federal Courts in this healthcare issue.
rangercarp From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 124 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4096 times:
An important point to keep in mind is that the constitution in no way requires that the president be born in the US or on US soil. It states the president must be a "natural born citizen." Some people interpret this phrase in different ways, but the widely held belief is that anyone who achieves their citizenship at birth is eligible to be president. In other words, if you are born in Indonesian, or Kenya, or on Mars, but at least one of your parents is a US citizen, you are a "natural born" US citizen. Once again, this is the generally accepted understanding of the constitution, but some people do contest this view, and to date it has not been tested.
The next requirement is of course the President must have lived at least 14 years in the US. No mention of these 14 years being the first 14 years of life, or the most recent 14 years for that matter. Any 14 years will do.
IADCA From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2007, 972 posts, RR: 7 Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4065 times:
Quoting planespotting (Reply 9): Frankly, I believe the point would be moot. His mother was a United States citizen, and considering he did not renounce his citizenship at the age of 18 to claim citizenship of whatever other country he was supposedly born in, he is by all intents and purposes a natural-born US citizen.
The issue would be fast tracked to the Supreme Court, who would hopefully quickly (and unanimously) decide in his favor (thereby averting a constitutional crisis), and everything would go back to normal.
While this is the obvious - and almost certainly correct - answer, there's actually very little precedent on point, and I don't believe any of it is from the Supreme Court. There has been at least one recent case where the Court was asked to rule on the constitutionality of the paternity/maternity distinction in birthright citizenship and the statutes that govern it (Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53 (2001), if anyone cares). However, the Court has never, to my knowledge, actually picked up the Constitutional question of what is actually required to be a "natural born citizen."
Quote: Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution specifies that, to be President or Vice
President, a person must be a natural-born citizen of the United States, at least 35
years of age, and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. Most
constitutional scholars interpret this language as including citizens born outside the
United States to parents who are U.S. citizens under the “natural born” requirement.
In other words, even if Obama were born out of the US he is eligible by having a parent who was born in the US, by being over 35 and by having lived in the US for 14 years. If he lied about the place of his birth, that might constitute a serious misdemeanor and that might render him liable to impeachment.
The validity of laws is an open question. The fact that the laws were accepted by Congress may mean that they may continue in force. The issue hasn't been tested and the Constitution offers no clear guidance. It may simple require the passing of an enabling Act confirming the validity of the laws rather than re-assenting to the individual laws by whoever were to replace the impeached President. Declaring all acts null and void would be impractical - the effects would touch everything from the bail-out following the GFC to continuing funding of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, let alone medicare and the block on funding relocation of inmates from Gitmo. The recent arms treaty with Russia would be thrown in doubt.
The uncertainty surrounding the validity of legislation could have a serious impact on trade, the value of the dollar and investment decisions previously made and pending. DADT could be back.
falstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 29 Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3983 times:
Quoting rangercarp (Reply 30): The next requirement is of course the President must have lived at least 14 years in the US. No mention of these 14 years being the first 14 years of life, or the most recent 14 years for that matter. Any 14 years will do.
srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16888 posts, RR: 51 Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3845 times:
Please keep the discussion within the realms of being a hypothetical/"what if?" situation. Please keep the politics limited to what is actually relevant to this discussion.
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9834 posts, RR: 17 Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3782 times:
Quoting stlgph (Reply 2): to this day there is still speculation among historians that Chester Arthur was born in Canada.
Some scolars question the eligability of those who were born in territories. Goldwater was born in Arizona Territory and a vice-presidential nominee (Clay, I think?) was born in Kansas Territory.
Since all the evidence points to the fact that Obama was, indeed, born in the State of Hawaii (not "territory"), this is a non-issue. However, I would think if a president were found to be in violation of any Constitutional rules, that president would have to step down and every bill that president signed into law would be challenged, at the very least.
IADCA From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2007, 972 posts, RR: 7 Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3754 times:
Quoting Quokka (Reply 19): The validity of laws is an open question. The fact that the laws were accepted by Congress may mean that they may continue in force.
The obvious solution for the majority of statutes would be to just entertain the legal fiction that they hadn't been signed (the "pocket veto" ). In that case, the vast majority of laws (those for which the 10-day signing period expires with Congress in session) would stand. So would anything that passed by greater than 2/3, since that's veto-proof and thus the signing is essentially a formality. Those laws that Congress adjourned shortly after passing with less than 2/3 would need to be examined further. I suspect they would stand as well. There's nothing inherently unconstitutional about a law that hasn't been signed by the President, at least under current jurisprudence - as incredible as that sounds. There are plenty of ways things become law without either the consent of Congress or the President. The most prominent one - Executive Orders - would pose a serious review problem in this hypothetical.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 22): Some scolars question the eligability of those who were born in territories. Goldwater was born in Arizona Territory and a vice-presidential nominee (Clay, I think?) was born in Kansas Territory.
This is really just a subset of the "natural born citizen" debate. Under the majority view, if your mother is a U.S. citizen, you would be a "natural born citizen" regardless of birthplace. Under the minority view, "natural born citizen" refers to the place of birth. Remember, the specific rules on birthright citizenship are statutory, and thus would be overridden by a judicial interpretation of the "natural born citizen" clause, to the extent of any conflict.
The "territory" question would be moot unless you were born there to a non-American mother (or to even an American father but didn't jump through the required hoops before age 18) or the "natural born citizen" clause was held to be solely based on birthplace. Considering the murky legal status of the various non-State U.S. "territories" - ranging from Guam and the NMI to USVI to Puerto Rico to DC - it's an interesting and open question. It's really one for a bunch of law professors sitting in their offices to debate without worrying about running up enormous bills for the clients. However, as U.S. courts are Constitutionally barred from issuing advisory opinions, I doubt it's one on which we'll get a judicial opinion anytime soon.
Also, people, please note that birthright citizenship is NOT automatic if only your father is a U.S. citizen. There are substantial differences in the law there, which have been upheld by the Supreme Court.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3743 times:
Quoting falstaff (Thread starter): What if Obama really wasn't born in the USA? What would happen?
Nothing
Quoting planespotting (Reply 7): His mother was a United States citizen, and considering he did not renounce his citizenship at the age of 18 to claim citizenship of whatever other country he was supposedly born in, he is by all intents and purposes a natural-born US citizen.
This is the key - no one has challenged that Ann was his mother and that she was a US citizen at the time of his birth.
Quoting jetBlueguy22 (Reply 6): I think it would be the Supreme Court. They would probably declare the presidency unconstitutional and he would be removed.
The US Supreme Court has already refused several times to hear challenges to Obama's citizenship status. They have made it very clear that his place of birth is not arguable after the US Congress in January 2009 ruled without any dissenting votes that he was eligible and was legally elected as President of the United States.
Quoting glydrflyr (Reply 16): First, if the sitting President were inarguably found to have been born in another sovereign county, he would probably be immeditely impeached on "high crimes and misdemeanors" grounds.
The Congress has already certified him eligible to hold the office of President. Even if the House was able to gather enough votes to impeach him - there are not enough votes in the Senate to remove him from office.
We, the taxpayers, spent close to 50 million dollars on the impeachment and Senate trial of President William Jefferson Clinton - when our Congressmen and Senators knew before anything started that he would not be removed from office.
While a certain percentage of the people will never believe that President Obama is legally a US citizen, a much greater percentage will always believe he is, and was legally elected. Unless President Obama came on national TV and confessed he had lied and resigned - more than half of the US citizens would always believe him the victim of a racist right-wing coup attempt.
That is the only way he would leave office - if he resigned.
25 rfields5421: Your answer It would be completely impractical for Congress to declare all the laws and appointments of the past two or three years were null and voi
26 IADCA: That's how the certiorari process always works. The Court generally refuses to decide questions unless they have to. The normal issue is that the Cir
27 Venus6971: Ok , the first 7 Presidents prior to Van Buren were not born American citizens but were born subjects of the British Crown. Before July 4 1776 they co
28 Maverick623: Since they were US citizens when the Constitution was ratified, they were legal.
29 Superfly: If he were to be thrown out, so would Joe Biden. Since President and Vice President are elected together and if Obama is indeed a fraud, Joe Biden wou
30 Maverick623: Um.... no. So long as Biden met all the qualifications himself to be VP (and President), there's no legal justification for booting him out too.
31 Superfly: Source? Undoing a Presidency is more than removing the man in the Oval Office.
32 Maverick623: The Constitution, specifically the 25th Amendment. Care to cite a court case that says otherwise? After all, you made the original claim.
33 Superfly: Please show the clause in the event of a fraudulent Presidency. No need to turn this in to a flame thread.
34 rfields5421: It is important to remember that the election of the Vice-President is a separate ballot / election than the election of the President. Nothing requi
35 Superfly: Sure about that? I've been voting since 1992 and I've never had the option of voting for a Vice President different than the party nominee's pick. Th
36 moose135: Yes, the nominee selects a running mate, but the party's nominating convention elects the VP nominee. Has that ever not been the person selected by t
37 rfields5421: You are talking about your individual vote/ your ballot. Your ballot has not value/ importance in the election of a President under the Constitution,
38 rfields5421: Something else to remember about the 12th Amendment. It setup the Vice-Presidency as a member of the President's administration. The Constitution orig
39 MEA-707: Also if you were right, they would have booted out Ford as well when Nixon left in august 1974 and put in the leader of the house or McGovern. I thin
40 IADCA: Sure you have. You can write in whomever you like. It would be awkward in terms of electors, but you can always do it. You can also vote for the elec
41 Superfly: Not true because Gerald Ford was not on the ballot in 1972. It was Spiro Agnew. He quit a year after getting re-elected.
42 zippyjet: And on a sarcastic humorous note: What if Elvis is really still alive? Happy New Year to all.
43 slz396: In my view the US Constitution should be mondernised on the 'natural born' issue! While I can fully understand the point of wanting to limit the US Pr
44 planespotting: That's because, Superfly, neither you, nor I, or anyone else on a-net unless they were a designated member of the electoral college, have never voted
45 Superfly: Already been stated in this thread planespotting. How many times does it need to be repeated?
46 AGM100: OK we finally figured it out . Senator Obama was born in Kenya ... President Obama was in fact born in Hawaii its settled ! ... Senator Obama the one
47 planespotting: As many times as it takes!! In all fairness, I apologize for beating a dead horse.
48 Bongodog1964: As a non US citizen I feel I have to ask the question "Does it really matter" ? None of us choose our place of birth, we all do however as adults get
49 Superfly: Yep! It's written in the Constitution. If Obama is lying about it, then he is in big trouble! Which bars us from many top government post in many cou
50 rfields5421: The Constitution does not have the concept of a fradulent Presidency. Is this more activism trying to add 'intent' or 'what if' rather than applying
51 Superfly: Hence why this thread was started in the first place. Same thing. Let's not get caught up in symantics. ...and that is all I was simply discussing. T
52 CPH-R: It would certainly present an interesting legal issue, due to the laws in place at the time of BO's birth. Namely that his mother would not have been
54 propilot83: Anyone who does not like Obama or the US government, will think that Obama was not born in the US. I believe its time to cut this crap and bullshit ab
55 Bongodog1964: To my mind I would rather have the best candidate for the job, rather than the one whose parents made the right decisions on their behalf. I make thi
56 Superfly: Oh well. Perhaps writing a letter to the United Nations advising all nations with similar laws in place to change it.
57 Bongodog1964: As the self proclaimed leaders of the free world, might the US set an example to the less enlightened nations ?
58 rfields5421: I also wonder if it is an actual quote of a real law, and not one of the revised versions floating around the web. Numerous references say one US Imm
59 CPH-R: It's a quote from Eugene Volokh (legal commentator and law professor at the UCLA School of Law): http://volokh.com/posts/1227910730.shtml But yeah, i
60 rfields5421: Okay - now I see that these words are not part of the law - but the fellow's opinion. One reason I asked is that I know several US citizens who are c
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 5673 posts, 
From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2232 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2007, 972 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
