I know the Constitution is on life support if not already dead, but Harris is not a natural born citizen and is not eligible to assume the office.
Vice President Kamala Harris was born on October 20, 1964 in Oakland, California to two immigrant parents: mom Shyamala Gopalan, and dad Donald Harris. A prominent cancer researcher before passing away in 2009, Gopalan was born in India and came to the United States to get her PhD from the University of California, Berkeley. Donald Harris was born in Jamaica but immigrated to the United States for a graduate degree, eventually becoming a Professor of Economics at Stanford University.
Vice President Kamala Harris was born on October 20, 1964 in Oakland, California to two immigrant parents: mom Shyamala Gopalan, and dad Donald Harris.
This is the precise argument against "birthright citizenship" as it is put into practice in the US. Per the , "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
It is the "...and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" portion that is in debate. A strict reading of the Constitution, paired with an understanding of the political climate during which it was written, would lead you to understand that simply being born in the country does not confer citizenship. (Jus soli vs. jus sanguinis.)
But, as you've pointed out, the Constitution is on life support, and this would not be the slightest impediment to Harris' assumption of the office. It's already de-facto decided since she's "qualified" to be VP.
(post is archived)