Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Texas bill would require birthplace proof for presidential candidates

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:10 PM
Original message
Texas bill would require birthplace proof for presidential candidates
Source: Boston Herald

ORTH WORTH, Texas — A state lawmaker wants to make sure that any candidate on the presidential ticket from now on can show proof they were born in the United States — or not be allowed on the Texas ballot.

State Rep. Leo Berman this week said he’s planning to file several immigration-related bills once Texas lawmakers get back to work in January, including one that requires presidential and vice presidential candidates to prove their citizenship to the Texas secretary of state before their names are added to the ballot.

* * *
"We’ll do it," said Berman, a Republican and a former Arlington, Texas, mayor pro tem. "We’ll do it from now on. If he can’t prove citizenship ... he won’t have a place on the Texas ballot."

* * *
Berman also plans a broad bill similar to the Arizona law, which makes being an undocumented worker a crime. He specifically wants to include the measure to allow law enforcement officials to ask people who they believe may be in the country illegally about their status.

Read more: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/20100429texas_bill_would_require_birthplace_proof_for_presidential_candidates/srvc=home&position=recent



Wow, the neo-Nazi have invaded the State legislatures. "Show me your papers!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. They still don't know Hawaii is a U.S. state?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. Who's he?
"We’ll do it," said Berman, a Republican and a former Arlington, Texas, mayor pro tem. "We’ll do it from now on. If he can’t prove citizenship ... he won’t have a place on the Texas ballot."

Gov Perry of Texas already said the AZ immigration law wasn't for them in Texas..we'll see who wins that one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4362138

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. gee, guess they took the maps outta those text books too?
bozos
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downwinder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. So much for McCain's candidacy. The Bush administration
argued that Guantanamo was not US territory, same argument would go for the Canal Zone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #4
21. McCain's case was taken up by the Supreme Court back in 1960
Barry Goldwater had been born in Arizona Terrirory.

The Supremes ruled that a US territory qualified as US born under the Constitution, which would qualify McCain too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. He's such a nut even Perry threw up his hands at this and went Whoa! I'm not with him!
Edited on Thu Apr-29-10 11:45 PM by Lone_Star_Dem
Which is really saying something considering Perry runs around with the likes of Palin and Beck without batting and eye. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. Why am I thinking bedbug epidemic?
A microscopic infestation that just keeps biting...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
7. Does a COLB qualify?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. If issued by a state of the United States at the time of birth, yes. Otherwise, not necessarily.
Edited on Fri Apr-30-10 02:04 AM by No Elephants
Did you have anything specific in mind?

(j/k)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Indydem Donating Member (866 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #7
19. Not in AZ
Their law requires a long-form birtch certificate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 01:59 AM
Response to Original message
8. Pres. Obama proved that he is a "natural born citizen".
Edited on Fri Apr-30-10 02:07 AM by No Elephants
I think making everyone else prove that he or she, too, meets the Constitutional requirement to be President is a good idea. Maybe the law should be a federal law, though, instead of varying from state to state.

However, Texas seems to be assuming that it has to do only with place of birth, rather than with citizenship of the parents. Since the Supreme Court has not yet fixed the limits of what a "natural born citizen" means, that is a shaky assumption on the part of Texas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
14thColony Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:09 AM
Response to Original message
10. Well if ANYTHING good should come from this
It might force Congress or the USSC to define what a 'naturally born citizen' is. Texas and Arizona are asserting it means born in the United States, but there's no solid legal grounds for that assertion. The Constitution sure never defines the term, and there's just as much legal history to support that it merely means 'someone who did not have to be naturalized in order to gain US citizenship.' I tend to believe the latter is what the founders intended, but at this point it's never been established.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. I thought it just meant that no clones could be president...
Cause I know the same people who traveled back in time to orchestrate the great Obama is really a citizen in name only also went back to seed clones so they could run in the future...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:50 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. Well, you can be considered that and born overseas ro
if both parents are US citizen, or even if only one is, but that one parent had to be residing in the US for a specific amount of time prior to the birth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
14thColony Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 05:36 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Exactly
And that's why I think "natural-born" refers to someone who was bestowed citizenship as a birthright, either by being born in US territory or by inheriting it from at least one parent who already had it.

Since US law only refers to natural citizens and naturalized citizens, it also begs the question what's this other third type of citizen who doesn't fall into either of those catagories?

Answer: there isn't one, except in the minds of right-wingers. A natural-born citizen is anyone who did not have to go through the naturalization process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pundaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:14 AM
Response to Original message
11. Is there any humanity in Texas?. Criminalizing a fellow human for taking a job, while ignoring the
low-wage employer root cause of the problem is indefensible. I can not distinguish Texans in the news from tea party maroons. It's just one idiot eruption after another. How is it that they elect so many of these guys?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 05:23 AM
Response to Original message
14. Holy jumpin moly! The Rs is a-skeered Obama'll carry the Lone Star in 2012!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
16. We must STOP the Socilists!!!! or we are SCREWN!!!!!
they are all now exposing themselves for the nutjobs they are. This is great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beer Snob-50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
17. omg
check out the boston herald story and teh comments at the end. i am embarassed to be called a citizen of this state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
18. This country has truly devolved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
20. These sorts of things should be considered acts of sedition and war
and dealt with accordingly. Otherwise this will continue right on through 2012.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
22. You have to prove that you are WHITE too!
Read the fine print.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC