Short answer - yes. Being a natural born citizen does not mean you are born in the US. It means that you are born with that citizenship, irregardless of the location of birth. So, the previous examples above (being born overseas to two US parents) does apply.
A person cannot be president if they were not a natural born citizen.
So, to cite an example, a child is born to a parent who is a US citizen while in Paris, France, under the Eiffel Tower (point being, not on US sovereign territory, such as a US Military Base or the US Embassy). That person is considered a natural born citizen, because they were born with the citizenship, due to the fact that the parent is a US citizen. Thus, that child may hold the office of President of the United States later, provided they do not renounce citizenship, or do something else to get them disqualified.
2007-02-19 11:44:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Big Super 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
No.
I don't know if he was related or not, but in the early 70's, George Romney was governor of, I believe, Michigan, and much as he wanted to do so, could not run for the Presidency. He had been born of American citizens, but they were in Mexico at the time of his birth.
There has been no constitutional change since then that would allow this to happen. However, I think that there ought to be one that would cover circumstances such as the one above.
Think of it this way - can the world as a whole afford to not have as the US President a person who was born overseas because they had a parent/parents is the diplomatic core, who moved around from country to country with their parents' assignments, who is fluent in several languages and is intimately familiar with several cultures?
This lack of an amendment also keep someone ineligible for office if they were born overseas because a parent was working overseas or going to school overseas, or on a military assignment overseas, and Mom was that parent or went with Dad.
2007-02-19 19:35:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
No. One of the requirements to be President of the US is that the person be a "natural-born citizen", meaning they had to be born in the United States.
2007-02-19 22:17:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by frenchy62 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
2007-02-19 19:32:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by yupchagee 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
The only way possible, is to be born to American citizens who happen to be outside of the U.S. Naturalized citizens are prohibited by law to become president. Hopefully this law will stand as writen. There has been some stirring from the Swartzenager camp to promote a constitutional amendment to change this.
2007-02-19 19:39:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bonnie K 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
You could be Speaker of the House and become President after the serving President and Vice President die in office.
2007-02-19 20:06:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by lordkelvin 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. If the person's parents are U.S. citizens, but the person was born in another country, then he or she could qualify for president. Otherwise, the person would have to be born in the U.S.
2007-02-19 19:37:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Steph 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
Since the country didn't exist prior to the
Declaration, all of the presidents born
overseas or in the colonies would have
not been born in the USA.
Other than that, I think the Constitution
tries pretty hard to prevent it.
2007-02-19 19:32:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Elana 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
I guess if your parents were US citizens and you were born in a US embassy, that would be acceptable. Otherwise no.
Arnold Schwarzenegger can never be President of the United States.
2007-02-19 19:38:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by redunicorn 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
There is but it would require that this be made an amendment which would really get confusing because it would contradict the Constitution, but this has been done on other matters but it is a painstakingly long process that would be a waste of time and effort if any house doesn't pass it or if the supreme court says otherwise.
2007-02-19 19:43:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by Ann 3
·
0⤊
3⤋