United States Constitution
29 February 2008 - 10:22am
'Strict constructionists' must disqualify John McCain
He's not a natural-born citizen, is he?
McCain's likely nomination as the Republican candidate for president and the happenstance of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a "natural-born citizen" can hold the nation's highest office.
Almost since those words were written in 1787 with scant explanation, their precise meaning has been the stuff of confusion, law school review articles, whisper campaigns and civics class debates over whether only those delivered on American soil can be truly natural born. To date, no American to take the presidential oath has had an official birthplace outside the 50 states.
"There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent," said Sarah Duggin, an associate professor of law at Catholic University who has studied the issue extensively. "It is not a slam-dunk situation."
McCain was born on a military installation in the Canal Zone, where his mother and father, a navy officer, were stationed. His campaign advisers say they are comfortable that McCain meets the requirement and note that the question was researched for his first presidential bid in 1999 and reviewed again this time around.
So maybe it's a gray area. Isn't this where the self-proclaimed 'strict constructionists' get all holier-than-thou and demand that the Constitution be interpreted as narrowly as possible?
True conservatives who actually walk the walk and don't just talk the talk must proclaim John McCain as not eligible to hold presidential office.
Cue the right-wing hypocrisy....
store
Buy stuff here.













