Would you repeal the "natural-born citizen" clause?

[Sir Mohamed]

Would you repeal the natural born citizen clause for presidents/vice president? Say a requirement that a candidate must be a US citizen for 10 or 15 years or so.

[RINO Tom]

Of course not.

[Goldwater]

Yeah. I don't see why it's necessary in modern society.

[Zioneer]

We don't exactly have people trying to establish monarchy in the US anymore, and that was the main reason for the clause, so I'd be in support of removing it, but leaving all other requirements in place.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Of course not.

[SWE]

I mean it's already obsolete thanks to that whole Bill of Rights thing, so sure.

[The Dowager Mod]

No.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes (normal)

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

Yeah. I don't see why it's necessary in modern society.

[Ljube]

Yes.

[President Johnson]

Yeah. I don't see why it's necessary in modern society.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

No. Definitely not.

[SATW]

Yes, but with stipulations. I think we need to keep the 14 year residency clause.

[Santander]

Maybe, but the residency requirement should be kept. Anchor babies are a bigger potential problem than the natural-born requirement.

[hurricanehink]

Yes. It is the only job that an immigrant cannot ever dream to attain. This will forever stop the issues concerning Obama or Cruz's viability. Whether they were born in the country or not shouldn't be a factor, not when the electorate does a good enough job determining which people should become president. If someone like Trump can become the nominee of their party, then why not someone who was born abroad to non-Americans? We haven't had a really powerful senator/governor for a while who was born abroad, but I remember this issue being discussed as Governor Schwarzenegger was finishing his 2nd term around 2008.

[kyc0705]

Yes, because then I'd get to theoretically run for President someday (not that I'd actually want to, but the possibility would be nice).

[TDAS04]

Yeah, probably modify to 20 years of citizenship.

[Californiadreaming]

Yes, certainly! After all, a naturalized U.S. citizen can be just as loyal as a natural-born U.S. citizen can be!

[Californiadreaming]

Yes, because then I'd get to theoretically run for President someday (not that I'd actually want to, but the possibility would be nice).

If you don't mind me asking, where exactly were you born?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Maybe, but the residency requirement should be kept. Anchor babies are a bigger potential problem than the natural-born requirement.

[Santander]

Maybe, but the residency requirement should be kept. Anchor babies are a bigger potential problem than the natural-born requirement.

I think there should be a residency requirement to ensure someone is "sufficiently American", regardless  of where they were born. Most naturalized citizens meet this requirement anyway.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Probably not. Seems like a lot of effort for a non-issue.

[Green Line]

Yes.  It's irrelevant in the modern world.  I understand why they had it back then, though.

[Californiadreaming]

Probably not. Seems like a lot of effort for a non-issue.

Would you likewise say that this is a non-issue if, say, women or African-Americans rather than naturalized U.S. citizens were constitutionally ineligible to become U.S. President?

[Lothal1]

No.