HRH *SoAndSo* Mountbatten-Windsor...President of the United States of America

Disclaimer: This is just a thought experiment, but I thought it was an interesting hypothetical to explore…

Could Prince Harry’s and Meghan Markle’s children be elected and serve as President(s) of the United States?

My answer: Apparently, yes, it is possible. Provided they meet the age and residency requirements, it seems that Obama’s presidency set the precedent that a member of the British Monarchy could be eligible to serve as POTUS.

According to some reports, Meghan Markle intends on keeping her U.S. citizenship (although she is reportedly applying for UK citizenship, too). If that’s true, her children will be born U.S./UK dual citizens.

Likewise, even if she gives up her U.S. citizenship, it will take three years for her to get through the process to become a UK citizen and during the time, she will be a U.S. citizen. So, if they have children within those three years, they will acquire U.S. citizenship at birth.

This is not unlike Obama. According to FactCheck:

When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom's dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.'s children:


"British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth."

In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC. 

So, it is possible that a member of the British Monarchy could be eligible to serve as U.S. president.

Is this what the drafters intended when they wrote the ‘natural born Citizen’ eligibility requirement in Article II of the U.S. Constitution? My personal opinion is no. That’s a scenario they were probably specifically trying to avoid.

What do you think? Discuss…

Interesting!

Rainbows
Jane

Intriguing! Brings to mind this little prank(?):

NOTICE OF REVOCATION OF INDEPENDENCE

To the citizens of the United States of America, In the light of your failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective today.

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except Utah, which she does not fancy. Your new prime minister (The rt. hon. Tony Blair, MP for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed.

To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up "aluminium". Check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. Generally, you should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up "vocabulary". Using the same twenty seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. Look up "interspersed".

2. There is no such thing as "US English". We will let Microsoft know on your behalf.

3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents. It really isn't that hard.

4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the good guys.

5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The Queen", but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you to get confused and give up half way through.

6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game.

The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football.

Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at least a US rugby sevens side by 2005.

7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if they give you any merde. The 98.85% of you who were not aware that there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky. The Russians have never been the bad guys. "Merde" is French for "sh*t".

8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 8th will be a new national holiday, but only in England. It will be called "Indecisive Day".

9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and it is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

10. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.

Thank you for your cooperation.

link

a reply to: MindBodySpiritComplex



Funny stuff!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Might as well add that this was not written by John Cleese of Monty Python fame!

It started with a shorter version byAlan Baxter of Rochester, U.K. commenting the 2000 presidential election Bush vs. Gore.

But I will stop derailing the thread now. In fact I think the op may be on to something. Maybe HRH wants to be prepared - just in case...

a reply to: MindBodySpiritComplex

Ha...derail away! I don't think most people will have an opinion until we find out whether Harry's & Meghan's kids are Democrats or Republicans.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

There won't be presidents by the time they have adult sons/daughters. Maybe they could be political leaders, part of a supranational union.

You know that Mountbatten in reality is Battenberg and was only changed to Mountbatten because a german name in the british royal family was not so.... amusing for the brits.

a reply to: DerBeobachter

a reply to: DerBeobachter

Quite.

Most people forget that the British Royal Family, at least for the past 200 years or so, are actually intertwined with German Royalty (and Russian)....But that has been a practice of European Royalty for centuries, often to keep "Peace" by marrying into the family.

My city was named after the British Queen of the early 1800s.....

Amalie Adelheid Louise Therese Karolina Wilhelmina. Better known as "Queen Adelaide", was born in the small German Duchy of Saxe-Meiningen, and Married the Future king of England, William 5th, in 1818 when she was 25yo and he was 52yo.....he had many bastard children, which she looked after, but all 4 of her own children died in infancy.

As so, King William had no heir, so the next in line was Queen Adelaide's German niece....Victoria.....and so it goes.

But even in History, England has had many "foreign" Kings, Vikings, Saxons, Normans (Viking Descendants)....etc.

All good fun....that's why Native English and Native Germans should be best of friends.....they are cousins!!.

a reply to: MotherMayEye
Doesn't it depend on where they are born? I can't see the mother making overseas journeys with a birth imminent.
Apart from that, why would an HRH want the American job?

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: MotherMayEye
Doesn't it depend on where they are born?

No.

The laws are such that Meghan's children will acquire U.S. citizenship at birth -- no matter where they are born -- as long as she is a U.S. citizen.

a reply to: MotherMayEye
I was thinking specifically of the Presidency, as mentioned in the thread title. Surely THAT still requires birth within the United States?

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: MotherMayEye
I was thinking specifically of the Presidency, as mentioned in the thread title. Surely THAT still requires birth within the United States?

That's the debate...

The Constitution only says "natural born Citizen."

Ted Cruz was born in Canada and many people insisted he was a "natural born Citizen."

a reply to: MotherMayEye

The first seven presidents of The U.S. where born as British Subjects.

a reply to: MotherMayEye
Here is the criteria for birthright citizenship, with jus sanguinis criteria:

Birthright citizenship may be conferred by jus soli or jus sanguinis. Under United States law, U.S. citizenship is automatically granted to any person born within and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. This includes the territories of Puerto Rico, the Marianas (Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands), and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and also applies to children born elsewhere in the world to U.S. citizens (with certain exceptions).
...
Children born overseas to married parents

The following conditions affect children born outside the U.S. and its outlying possessions to married parents (special conditions affect children born out of wedlock: see below):[15]

If both parents are U.S. citizens, the child is a citizen if either of the parents has had residency in the U.S. prior to the child's birth

If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is a U.S. national, the child is a citizen, if the U.S. citizen parent has lived in the U.S. for a continuous period of at least one year prior to the child's birth

If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is not a U.S. citizen or national, the child is a citizen if the U.S. citizen parent has been "physically present"[16] in the U.S. before the child's birth for a total period of at least five years, and at least two of those five years were after the U.S. citizen parent's fourteenth birthday.

the U.S. citizen parent has not been "physically present" for a total period of at least five years, then a U.S. citizen grandparent must has been "physically present" for at least five years.[18]

I've known children of missionaries to foreign countries and U.S. military personnel stationed out of country . According to them, the large stack of documentation required if born out of country is a major factor when considering the desirability to give birth in U.S.

The emolument clause of U.S. Constitution would require that the royal title would have to be approved by Congress.

In the event that the sitting President becomes eligible to assume the throne of a foreign government, it would become a personal choice. Presidencies can be resigned from, and thrones can be abdicated. Holding both would be a conflict of interest.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: MotherMayEye

The first seven presidents of The U.S. where born as British Subjects.

Hence the grandfather clause.

And that's completely irrelevant to this thread. I am sure you already knew that.

a reply to: pthena

Thank you for bringing interesting info into the thread, pthena!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Hence the only " True " Americans are Native Indians.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Obama is no longer president. Who cares anymore.