Only the ones who are natural born citizens over the age of 35 with 14 years of residency in the US, right?
-
-
I didn't know there was a 14 year US residency requirement. Are you sure about that?
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Yes, it's in the Constitution.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Hm. Do you count as losing residency if you've been continuously airdropping into various countries to take down their secret leaders and prevent the (rolls dice) Russian (rolls dice) dirty bomb (rolls dice) cult (rolls dice) from destabilizing (rolls dice) Southern Madagascar?
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Seriously: As long as your listed residence is USA-land... Not Seriously: Rule of cool says yes.
3 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Yeah, service oversees, holidays, etc … don’t make a difference, it’s where your registered “residency” is that matters.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @bazzalisk @banalexistence and
Like, you could have spent several years as the US ambassador to France and living in Paris and it wouldn’t be a problem, because that wasn’t your *home* just an extended work trip.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @bazzalisk @banalexistence and
Well, Jefferson wouldn't have been hit by it either way, he obviously spent more than 14 years of his life cumulatively inside the (future) United States before he became the ambassador to France
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @bazzalisk and
I initially thought the number 14 was intended to mean you had to be a US resident continuously between the founding of the US in 1776 and the first presidential inauguration under the Constitution but the math is off - the first inauguration was in 1789, only 13 years later
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @bazzalisk and
So nobody could possibly have been a "US resident" for more than 14 years at that point, and the intended meaning was to "grandfather in" residency in the colonies that would become the US later
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes
With that in mind, the residency requirement in Article 2 remains ambiguous (like a lot of the other specifics in the Constitution) because it's never been seriously challenged, all the serious candidates for President have met the requirement by any possible definition
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.