New Jersey Democratic Party Challenges Independent Presidential Candidate Shiva Ayyadurai

On August 1, the New Jersey Democratic Party asked the New Jersey Secretary of State to remove Shiva Ayyadurai from the ballot.  He is an independent presidential candidate with the ballot label “Dr. Shiva.”  He was not born in the United States.  See this story.

As already noted, New Jersey has traditionally not enforced presidential qualifications, and has printed the names of six minor party and independent presidential or vice-presidential candidates who were under age 35, or who were not born in the United States.


Comments

New Jersey Democratic Party Challenges Independent Presidential Candidate Shiva Ayyadurai — 38 Comments

  1. Aren’t folks in NJ actually voting for his presidential electors and his name is just being used as a placeholder for them? Richard, do any states still print the prez electors on their ballots?

  2. https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/01/politics/5th-circuit-voting-rights-act-redistricting-south/index.html

    Appeals court narrows Voting Rights Act’s scope for redistricting cases in the South
    By Tierney Sneed, CNN

    Published 9:22 PM EDT, Thu August 1, 2024

    CNN —
    The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed the scope of the Voting Rights Act for redistricting cases in a large swath of the South, ruling against the Justice Department and voters of color who had challenged Galveston, Texas’s county commission map for how it been redrawn to dismantle a district where minorities made up a majority of the population.
    The conservative appeals court on Thursday reversed its previous precedent that allowed multiple minority groups to join together in challenges to redistricting plans alleged to be discriminatory under the VRA.
    Circuit Judge Edith Jones, a Reagan appointee, wrote in the majority opinion that so-called coalition districts are “inconsistent with the text” of the Voting Rights Act.

    https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.216176/gov.uscourts.ca5.216176.347.1.pdf

    The Supreme Court has not directly addressed the question of coalition districts and the Voting Rights Act. Other circuit courts have disagreed over whether the landmark civil rights law contemplated such legal challenges by multi-racial coalitions.

  3. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2024/08/01/supreme-court-immunity-congress-schumer-no-kings-act/74640621007/

    In an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court’s immunity decision, Schumer introduces the No Kings Act
    Mary Clare Jalonick
    Associated Press
    Washington — Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer introduced legislation Thursday reaffirming that presidents do not have immunity for criminal actions, an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last month.
    Schumer’s No Kings Act would attempt to invalidate the decision by declaring that presidents are not immune from criminal law and clarifying that Congress, not the Supreme Court, determines to whom federal criminal law is applied.

    TOO LITTLE — TOO LATE ???

  4. According to the Democrats, Indian antisemite Kamala Harris should be on the ballot, but Indian antisemite Shiva Ayyadurai should not.

    What are the differences?
    Kamala was born in the US – or well in California, anyway – to two non-American parents, a not yet naturalized Indian mother and a not yet naturalized Jamaican father from a slave-owning family.
    Shiva was born in India to two non-American parents, both Indian and not yet naturalized.

    So neither of them are eligible for the presidency or vice presidency, since neither of them are natural born citizens. But for some reason the Democratic Party only objects to the one who is not in their party appearing on the New Jersey ballot…

    Wouldn’t it be funny if the SoS bars both of them from the ballot thanks to the Democrats’ efforts.

  5. WOW! John McCain III was born in the Republic of Panama to two US Citizen that were not wed. Thy had a sham wedding in a bar in TJ, Baja California. The requirement was wed at the office of civil registry and that did not happen. McCain was never a citizen of the United States.

    At least Dr. SHIVA was naturalized.

  6. His parents’ marital status aside, McCain is not a natural born citizen, because he was not born in the Panama Canal Zone. They later tried to pretend he was born at Coco Solo naval hospital, but in fact his mother had been taken to a civil hospital outside of the Canal Zone when she went into labor.

    And Senate Resolution 511 “recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen” is legally null and void. The senate does not have the legal authority to declare someone a natural born citizen. It’s just pretentious and meaningless melodrama without any legal weight.

  7. Nuna,

    You correct about the Senate authority. However being born in the Republic of Panama can give a person US Citizenship of his parents were wed. They were not we’d. Therefore McCain was not ever a US Citizen.

  8. Natural born citizenship has nothing to do with marital status. Per Vattel, it stems completely from the father’s citizenship. McStain’s father was most definitely a US citizen at the time of his birth, so no matter where in the world where he was born, he was a natural born US cit. Regardless, this should be an issue for the Electoral College to deal with. It is their responsibility and probably also Congress’ to vet the qualifications of the eventual president.

  9. Under US law, citizenship is not the same as natural born citizenship.

    For example, if someone were born outside* of the US to a US citizen father and a non-US* citizen mother, then they would inherit their fathers US citizenship, but they would never be able to run for (vice) president because they are not a natural born US citizens.

    *Barring countries which the US does not recognize, countries which the US does not allow dual-citizenship with and countries against which the US has specific sanctions in place at time of birth

  10. NBC = FATHER IS A USA CITIZEN [NBC OR NATURALIZED] THE SECOND THE FATHER’S KID IS BORN.

    NATION-STATE ALLEGIANCE CHAIN.

    SEE LAST PARA OF 4 JULY 1776 DOI —–
    STATE 1 MASS. — END BRIT RULE ON 19 APR 1775 – BATTLES OF LEXINGTON AND CONCORD.

    STATES 2-13 — NEW STATE CITIZENS ON 4 JULY 1776 — IF LOYAL TO NEW STATE REGIMES [ALL REVOLUTIONARY].

    POSSIBLE NC STATE 2 BEFORE 4 JULY 1776.

    ALL SORTS OF ALLEGIANCE TESTS/OATHS IN 1775-1784

    — PURGES / ATTAINER ACTS / ALLEGIANCE-TREASON TRIALS / ETC. OF BRIT ROYALISTS.

    PLACE OF BIRTH MEANS ZERO.

  11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War

    WIKI — MANY DEAD AMERICANS – BATTLES – BRIT PRISONERS – DISEASE / HEAT / COLD / WOUNDS / NO-BAD FOOD / SHELTER

    MANY YOUNG AND BRAVE DEAD/INJURED – PRE-TEENS AND BARELY OLDER — SOME PENSIONS INTO 1860S

    MANY BATTLES WITH STATE MILITIA UNITS – ESP AFTER USA REGULARS GOT BEAT BY BRITS >>> 1-8-16, 2 AMDT

  12. OLDE QUO WARRANTO CASES RE QUALIFICATIONS/ETC TO HOLD A PUBLIC OFFICE ARE NOW ROUTINE CIVIL ACTIONS

    — WITH POSSIBLE CRIMINAL STUFF — IE IMPERSONATING A PUBLIC OFFICER — MAJOR FELONY IF MILITARY / COP OFFICER.

  13. Jeff, five states still print the names of presidential elector candidates on the ballot. But voters can’t vote for individual candidates for elector.

  14. McCain parents were both US Citizens.
    They were no wed in TJ, Baja California, Mexico. It was a sham wedding in a bar and not the Office of Civil Registry.

    McCain was born in the Republic of Panama to an U.S. Citizen that was not married. Therefore under US law she could not pass her citizenship on to her some. That was because of treaties the U.S. had with Panama and Mexico. The law was clear McCain could
    not be a US Citizen under the law granting conditional US Citizenship to persons born in the Republic of Panama.

    However he was not stateless, because he was a Citizen of the Republlc of Panama.

  15. RICHARD,

    California law requires a ballot notice that one is voting for electors by voting POTUS and VPOTUS. However the CA SOS has directed the Counties not to follow that law. Just several County election official have not followed those instructions.

  16. AZ.

    I have transited the Canal Zone many times.

    However, McCain was not born in the Canal Zone. He was born outside of the Canal Zone. He was born to an American Citizen mother in the Republic of Panama.

    Congress granted US Citizenship to persons born in the Repubic of Panama as they did to person born in Oregon Country under the terms of the Garfield Act of 1877.

    Please remember the Southern limit of the 1799 Ukase was 55 degress North Latitude and the part of Prince of Wales Island to the south of that latitude was an exception in the Alaska Treaty of 30 March 1867.

  17. Dr. Shiva argues that consitutional amendments have already overriden the “natural born” clause.

    I would think that the power to determine whether you are a citizen of the US at birth depends on where you are born AND what the policy/law was at the time. If born in the US to foreign parents, it depends on US policy. The US can accept you or reject you.

    If born to American parents abroad, it depends on that country’s policy and relationship with the US. The other country has to allow the US to claim you as a citizen.

  18. It doesn’t depend on any other country. The US doesn’t subject its citizens to foreign laws in that way.

    Various other claims above may be correct as to original intent, but they’re not correct as far as the actual law, as interpreted by the courts and applied. There’s no hint that the courts are likely to radically reinterpret those laws in the near term future. Under the standing interpretation of the law, Kamala Harris is a natural born US Citizen and Shiva Ayyudarai is not, and that’s very unlikely to change before the next president is inaugurated.

  19. @Will
    When you are born on foreign soil, you are subject to the laws thereof. For the US to claim you as a citizen, the foreign nation has to either consent diplomatically, or have its sovereignty violated by the US.

    Regardless, I agree with your conclusion.

  20. WILL ON,

    Please explain your view in more detail. What Foreign laws are you referring to?

  21. The Republic of Panama is “foreign soil”. Yet Congress granted citizenship to persons born in the Repubic of Panama with certain conditions, like employment of parent.

    They did the same thing in 1877 in that part of Canada being part of Oregon Country. That was under the Garfield Act of 1877.

  22. You’re subject to foreign laws on foreign soil. Not to whether your children are American citizens if you don’t have an opportunity to travel right when they’re born. The foreign country can only decide whether or not they’re dual citizens, not whether or not they’re US citizens. Each country has exclusive control over to whom it grants its citizenship, how and when.

  23. Will on’
    I was informed my Grandfather who was born in Siberia in either 1859 or 1860 was German (since my Paternal Great Grandparents move to Siberia were never Russian Subjects and came from an area in wwas part of a German Custom Union. Therefore I understand how someone born after circa 1855 to citizens of the US abroad could be an American Citizen at Birth. However that would not make the person a natural born citizen.

  24. This brings me to Obama who at birth in 1961 was a Subject of the Sultan of Zanzibar. Since his Paternal Grandfather became a Subject of that Sultan in 1919. When Obama was born Mombasa was a British Protectorate and Mombasa was under the sovereignty of Zanzbar.

  25. @Will
    “It doesn’t depend on any other country. The US doesn’t subject its citizens to foreign laws in that way.

    I think you probably have the correct end of the stick, judging from your follow-up, but just to make sure we’re on the same page:
    The US doesn’t subject its citizens to foreign laws on citizenship, but to it’s own foreign relations.
    I.e., there are (or used to be, at least) certain citizenships which the US does not allow you to hold simultaneously with US citizenship, even if you inherited both directly from your parents.

    And even for countries with which the US does recognize dual-citizenship (which is by far most countries), children born to (natural born) US citizen parents on foreign soil, are themselves citizens but not natural born citizens.

  26. @Adam Cerini
    “When you are born on foreign soil, you are subject to the laws thereof. For the US to claim you as a citizen, the foreign nation has to either consent diplomatically, or have its sovereignty violated by the US.”

    For better or worse, that is not quite correct. Much like the People’s Republic of China, the US picks and chooses when it does or doesn’t want to respect foreign laws as relating to its own (claimed) citizens.

    Take for example, age of consent laws regarding sex: If a US citizen has consensual sex (including after marriage) with someone who is over the age of consent in their country but not in the US, then upon returning to the US, that US citizen can be charged with statutory rape, even though they acted fully within the law of that foreign country.

  27. Nuns,istrictv

    You area not correct either. CHINA was a District of the USA until the early part of WWII. We had the United States District Court for China. That District used the laws of the District of Alaska during the operation of the
    Court. Jurisdiction then passed to Morocco with remaining cases when court ended.

  28. China was “Foreign Soil” like the Republic of Panama. I have been to parts of China under different foreign governments, Mongolia, Hong Kong. Macau, and the Repubic of China. I have never been to Red China. I was very carefull when I visited Mongolia not to have my entry into Mongolia stamped on my passport. That was because Mongolia was part of the United States District of China.

  29. These issues came up at a meeting between Carl Lomen of the Lomen Brothers of Nome, Alaska on 13 May 1924 at a Washington DC meeting with U. S. Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes, during that dates discussion of both Wrangell Island, Alaska (of the Arctic Ocean to the North of Siberia) and Swain’s Atoll near Samoa.

    Wrangell Island since 1 April 1924 during that year became the real estate owned by the Lomen Brothers of Nome and Herald Island 43 nm to the east of Cape Waring was owned by Captain Louis L. Lane of Nome, Alaska.

    During the 13 May 1924, Charles Evens Hughes told Carl Lomen about the History of the District of Louisiana formed in 1804.

  30. I don’t see how I wasn’t clear initially. Citizens who are not naturalized are natural born. Citizens of American patents born abroad are natural born according to the law as currently interpreted and applied, regardless of original intent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.