An intriguing name being floated out recently for Biden's VP is Tammy Duckworth. How do you guys feel about her?
I've not been terribly impressed with Duckworth as a speaker. She certainly has military bona fides and checks a lot of boxes in terms of "identity" -- woman, woman of color, veteran, disabled veteran. Good age (52), good amount of experience in government. Not much, if anything, in terms of private sector business experience. She's a moderate -- supports sensible gun-control and is a gun owner. Long history of family military service. So I think she'd be a decent choice -- not to me an overly great choice despite her inspirational story. One question I think I know the answer to, but she was not born on US soil, though her father was on military (or diplomatic) assignment in Asia. I assume that is not a disqualifier. My reticence about her is solely because I haven't been all that impressed with her when I hear her speak, that's all.
bing, bing, bing, bing! Give the poster a cigar! you are correct sir. please see below.
Most Americans believe that the term natural born citizen applies only to someone born on American soil. That is incorrect. Citizenship is not based on geography alone; it can also be based on blood. The citizenship status of the parents can determine citizenship of a child in the United States.
The term natural born citizen applies to the child of at least one parent who is an American citizen. Children whose parents are American citizens are not required to be naturalized because they are natural born citizens. Therefore, they are eligible to serve as president, even if they are born in a foreign country.
You are mostly describing birthright citizenship.
Unfortunately, as far as I know, the exact legal meaning of "natural born Citizen" (in particular as it applies to eligibility for POTUS or VPOTUS) has never been completely and officially codified, either in law or through SCOTUS decision. The Constitution uses the term, but does not define it.
Most definitions and usage that I am aware of is consistent with the term referring to people born within the boundaries of the United States, it's Territories and Districts.
I believe that most common current usage considers that to also includes US sovereign locations such as on board US flagged vehicles (ships, aircraft), embassies and most military bases. This would be consistent with both the William Rawle (1825) interpretation combined with Wilson's (1866) exception for children born of foreign embassy personnel (or say, hypothetical hostile soldiers occupying US soil). The latter point being inverted for US personnel abroad. If we say that the citizenship of children borne of such foreign operatives on US soil belongs to those foreign nations, then we have to consider the citizenship of children of US operatives abroad to belong to the US.
If Duckworth, for example, were born on a military base hospital ('don't know if that is the case) and/or
as a child of a parent who is operating as a US operative abroad (not just a citizen traveling abroad but also one charged by the US to be abroad), that would probably qualifier her in the eyes of most folks who think about this as a "natural born citizen'.
The caveat being: This definition has not actually ever been completely codified in law or via judicial interpretation. And there are many who hold with much stricter (or more expansive) interpretations. Often, of course, for partisan reasons.
Note: I personally have no strong opinion on Duckworth as a VP choice. I just find the 'natural born citizen' question interesting.