Native versus Natural born…hummm

The Congressional Research Service, the research arm of Congress, has launched a defense of Barack Obama’s presidential eligibility with a 50-page report that “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” author Jerome Corsi has described as a “polemic aimed at convincing readers” Obama meets the requirements to be president.

Shortly after Obama took office, it was CRS staffer Jerry W. Mansfield, an information research specialist in the Knowledge Services Group, who wrote a memo titled “Qualifications of Barack Obama to Be President of the United States” that seemed aimed at providing talking points for members of Congress whose constituents who were questioning the absence of documentation for Obama.

Now comes the new campaign from CRS Legislative Attorney Jack Maskel, which seems to redefine eligibility, equating “native born” with the constitutional “natural born” citizen.

The Constitution sets out three eligibility requirements to be President: one must be 35 years of age, a resident “within the United States” for 14 years, and a “natural born Citizen.” There is no Supreme Court case which has ruled specifically on the presidential eligibility requirements (although several cases have addressed the term “natural born” citizen), and this clause has been the subject of several legal and historical treatises over the years, as well as more recent litigation.

Is it me or does it seem that every time lawyers get their little hands on anything – one could easily accept that there are going to be haunting changes? Moreover this entire writing wants you, the educated reader, to comment on notions that may involve politics like pursuing an office, especially political correctness, insofar as language is once again being manipulated, and what are the other obvious issues with this writing?

%d bloggers like this: