A prominent Republican group is raising eyebrows with its recent argument that Vice President Kamala Harris is ineligible to run for president. The National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA), a GOP-aligned organization with a long history in conservative politics, is leaning on a highly controversial Supreme Court decision to support its claim.
The NFRA, which once counted former President Ronald Reagan among its members, has put forward a resolution arguing that Harris does not meet the constitutional requirements to hold the office of president. Their stance hinges on the interpretation of “natural-born citizen” as stated in Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
What’s shocking is that among the six Supreme Court cases they cite is the notorious Dred Scott v. Sandford decision from 1857. This ruling is often labeled one of the most reviled decisions in American legal history, as it denied citizenship and constitutional rights to African Americans, whether enslaved or free. The NFRA’s use of this case has drawn criticism, as the decision has been universally condemned for its racism and injustice.
The NFRA’s resolution, posted on page 37 of their platform document, argues that presidential candidates like Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Kamala Harris should be disqualified because their parents were not U.S. citizens at the time of their birth. The organization interprets the term “natural-born citizen” to mean someone born on American soil to parents who are both U.S. citizens.
The resolution was highlighted by attorney Andrew Fleischman, who shared the document on the social media platform Bluesky, drawing significant attention and controversy. Critics argue that this interpretation is outdated and rooted in discriminatory views, especially given the Dred Scott case’s infamous legacy.
Discover more from Baller Alert
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
![NYC Mayor Eric Adams Dodges Questions About Seeking "Political Favor" from Donald Trump [Video]](https://i0.wp.com/balleralert.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Untitled-design-2024-11-18T203303121.png?resize=350%2C250&ssl=1 "NYC Mayor Eric Adams Dodges Questions About Seeking \"Political Favor\" from Donald Trump [Video] - Baller Alert")
Fine. The 14th Amendment prohibits trump from running.
Ummm trumps mom was an immigrant. Sooo he’s not a citizen either? Oh and his grandfather was an immigrant – so his dad wasn’t a citizen either. So both of his parents aren’t citizens – therefore by this logic neither is Trump
Was immigrant mom a citizen when Donald was born? Yep, she was. Born on US soil AND born of US citizen parents…eligible.
No, it doesn’t. But maybe I can be convinced. Explain your reasoning please.
The Dred Scott decision is totally baseless. Like the 14th Amendment and the Wong Kim Ark case, the term ‘natural born citizen’ is not even mentioned much less defined. To the best of my knowledge, no such definition exists in law. Therefore, it is necessary to go to original sources and original intent. So what do we know?…
We know that John Jay wrote a letter to George Washington suggesting “Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & Seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the Administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.—”
As a lawyer, Jay knew the importance of words. John Jay would not have used a three word clause where the single word ‘citizen’ or even the two word ‘born citizen’ would have sufficed. So where did it come from? What is the significance of the word ‘natural’?
Simple. A set of books by Emerich deVattel called THE LAW OF NATIONS was used in US law schools both then and now. We know, thanks to Ben Franklin, that the drafting committee had that set of references at their disposal…”I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept, (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other to the college of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed3) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author.”
It should be the law. Trump needs to get the question resolved by filing a lawsuit against Harris who is already a usurper.