Arnold Schwarzenegger spent two terms as California's governor. He promised to straighten out the Golden State's fiscal affairs, but the exact opposite occurred as government and taxes grew, along with the size of the state's mounting debt. The only thing he proved himself good at was cheating on his wife and fathering children out of wedlock while married to a member of the Kennedy clan. Now the Austrian-born son of a Nazi commander wants the U.S. Constitution amended so that he can run for president in 2016. As a naturalized citizen, Schwarzenegger holds dual citizenship and is ineligible to run because he quite clearly is not a natural born citizen. The New York Post's Page Six column discusses Schwarzenegger's rumored plans to ensure that gets changed:
One source said: “Schwarzenegger has been talking openly about working on getting the constitutional rules changed so he can run for president in 2016. He is ready to file legal paperwork to challenge the rules.”
Arnie was born in Austria, and the US Constitution prevents foreign-born citizens from holding the nation’s top job. Any amendment to the Constitution must be approved by two-thirds majority in the House and the Senate.
But Arnold, who became a US citizen in 1983, still could mount a legal challenge. In 2010, he appeared on the ‘Tonight Show,’ and was asked by Jay Leno if he would make a White House run if the law were changed.
Schwarzenegger replied, “Without any doubt.” With America becoming more diverse, it is not clear what would happen if Arnie or any other foreign-born naturalized citizen decided to run.
Columbia University Law School professor Michael Dorf, an expert in constitutional law, said about the Governator’s case in 2007, “The law is very clear, but it’s not 100 percent clear that the courts would enforce that law rather than leave it to the political process.”The way things are headed in this country, Schwarzenegger probably won't need a constitutional amendment since our Supreme Court refuses to even say what a natural born citizen means when persons challenging candidates not meeting the constitutional requirement are denied the opportunity to have their cases heard and the so-called legal experts touted by our media keep amending its meaning on the fly. Once upon a time, it was pretty clear that only children born in the U.S. to American citizen parents were considered natural born. Then along came Obama and so-called constitutional scholars claimed a person need only be born on American soil in order to qualify regardless of their parents' citizenship status. After the Canadian-born Ted Cruz decided he wanted to run for president, some legal scholars began changing their tune and claiming that even persons born abroad who are deemed citizens at birth by an act of Congress are now considered natural born citizens. By 2016, I wouldn't be surprised if people begin reading the constitutional requirement as only requiring that a person be a citizen, regardless of how they attained that status, in order to meet the natural born citizenship requirement. The Bill of Rights are being read right out of the Constitution. Why wouldn't the natural born citizenship clause meet the same fate?