No, The Constitution Does Not Allow Children Born Of Non-Citizens To Become President Of The United States

Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley speaks during a campaign stop, Saturday, Dec. 30, 2023, in Coralville, Iowa. Haley is eligible for the presidency, despite claims otherwise on social media. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)
Published January 19, 2024

Nikki Haley, the daughter of two non-citizens, is patently ineligible to serve as President or Vice President under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution

The following analysis is a detailed response to critiques of an article I wrote earlier this month that garnered national attention, and was even Truthed by President Trump, shedding light on Nikki Haley’s ineligibility to serve as President or Vice President under the Constitution.  My article was published originally on my Substack and American Greatness, and was titled “The Constitution Absolutely Prohibits Nikki Haley From Being President Or Vice President.”

By Paul Ingrassia

As A Threshold Matter, Nikki Haley, The Daughter Of Two Non-Citizens, Must Provie Proof That Her Parents Were Lawful Residents When She Was Born

As we head into the New Hampshire Republican primary, the presidential field has consolidated around three major candidates: Donald Trump, the frontrunner by wide margins, Nikki Haley, and Ron DeSantis.  With Vivek Ramaswamy’s distant fourth place finish in Iowa and subsequent endorsement of the 45th President, Trump’s edge in New Hampshire looks insurmountable.  Recent polling suggests that he commands an outright majority of all New Hampshire GOP voters, meaning that even if all the remaining candidates dropped out and rallied around a single challenger to Trump, their collective effort would still fail – without, perhaps, outside help from Democrats and Independents.  With recent reports that Ron DeSantis’ War Room has been dissolved, and all the staff being laid off in the aftermath of Iowa’s disaster, it seems to have proven true Nikki Haley’s post-Iowa declaration that the Republican Primary has now become “a two person race.”


That is, unless the Constitution has any say.

If the only two remaining viable candidates are, in fact, Trump and Haley, it should actually just be a one-person race.  That is because of the two, Donald Trump is the only candidate still running who qualifies as a natural-born citizen under the Constitution’s Eligibility Clause in Article II, Section 1.  Unlike Nikki Haley, President Trump’s two parents were both citizens at the time he was born on American soil, in Queens, New York, in 1946.  His father was a citizen by birthright, his mother was naturalized – and completed the naturalization process years before Trump’s birth.  Therefore, he meets the Constitutional standard for eligibility.

Nikki Haley, on the other hand, is a much different story.  Nikki Haley was born “Nimarata Randhawa” in Bamberg, South Carolina, in 1972.  But at the time of her birth, neither one of her parents were American citizens.  As recently unearthed by investigative journalist Laura Loomer, both “Haley’s parents were Indian immigrants who did not become U.S. citizens until after her birth in 1972. Her father, Ajit Randhawa, became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1978, Haley’s office said. Her mother, Raj Randhawa, became a U.S. citizen in 2003, a year before Haley won a seat in the S.C. House.”

Loomer’s report further states her inability to confirm whether Haley’s parents actually ever went through the naturalization process to receive citizenship.  This, on its own, is quite worrying.  But even if one or both of Haley’s parents ultimately did become naturalized citizens subsequent to Haley’s birth, Haley has never demonstrated proof that her parents were lawful residents at the time she was born.

Critically, nobody seems to have answers as to whether Ajit and Raj Randhawa were lawfully permitted to reside in the United States at the time of Haley’s birth at all! Even if they were, what was the status of their lawful residence?  Were they here on student visas?  Some kind of employment visa?  Whatever might have been the 1972-equivalent of an H-1B, something else?  Nobody has answers to these critical questions.

Unless proven otherwise, one cannot be at fault for asking – based on the alarmingly scant information available on a leading presidential candidate – whether Haley’s parents were unlawfully residing as illegal aliens?  This would make Nikki Haley a so-called “anchor baby,” flouting the letter and spirit of the Constitution in the most obnoxious way possible.



RELATED: Fact Check: US-born Nikki Haley is eligible to be president based on citizenship

Published January 13, 2024
Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley is eligible to be president of the United States as she was born in the country, which makes her a “natural born citizen” under U.S. law, contrary to online posts saying she is ineligible because her immigrant parents were not yet naturalized by the time of her birth.
The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants citizenship to all people born in the United States and under its jurisdiction without regard to the parents’ citizenship at the time, according to constitutional scholars.
Facebook post, opens new tab shares a screenshot of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, opens new tab of the Constitution with the caption, “According to our constitution Nikki Haley is ineligible to run for president or be VP. Her parents were from India and here legally but NOT yet citizens when she was born. She is NOT a natural born citizen which is required of the constitution.”
Article II Section 1 Clause 5, opens new tab, as mentioned in the posts, reads, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
The claims gained traction after former U.S. President Donald J. Trump re-posted, opens new tab on Jan. 10 a Gateway Pundit article, opens new tab about a legal scholar asserting that the U.S. Constitution disqualifies Haley from the presidency.


RELATED: False claims question Haley’s eligibility to serve as US president

Published January 3, 2024

CLAIM: Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley is ineligible to be president because her parents were not U.S. citizens at the time of her birth.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Haley is a natural-born U.S. citizen who is eligible to serve as president. The former ambassador to the United Nations was born on Jan. 20, 1972, in Bamberg, South Carolina, according to information on her official website when she was governor of the state.

THE FACTS: With the Iowa caucuses just two weeks away, some on social media are erroneously claiming that Haley, who served as governor of South Carolina from 2011 to 2017, cannot legally hold the country’s highest office.

“Nikki Haley is Constitutionally ineligible to be President….or Vice President,” reads one post on X, formerly Twitter, that had received approximately 6,900 likes and shares as of Tuesday. The post links to an article that argues Haley is ineligible because her parents were not U.S. citizens when she was born.

In her 2012 autobiography, Haley wrote that her parents “were born in the Punjab region of India.” Haley’s office told South Carolina newspaper The State in 2015, when she was governor, that her father, Ajit Randhawa, became a U.S. citizen in 1978 — six years after Haley’s birth — while her mother, Raj Randhawa, was naturalized in 2003.

But experts agree Haley is a legitimate candidate as defined by the Constitution, regardless of her parents’ citizenship status. Her birth in Bamberg makes her a natural-born citizen, one of three qualifications to hold the U.S. presidency.

“Having been born in South Carolina, she is clearly a ‘natural born citizen,’ without regard to the fact that her parents were immigrants,” Geoffrey Stone, a professor of Law at the University of Chicago who is an expert on constitutional law, told The Associated Press.





Newscats – on Patreon or Payoneer ID: 55968469

Cherry May Timbol – Independent Reporter
Contact Cherry at: or
Support Cherry May directly at:


Why do CO2 lag behind temperature?

71% of the earth is covered by ocean, water is a 1000 times denser than air and the mass of the oceans are 360 times that of the atmosphere, small temperature changes in the oceans doesn’t only modulate air temperature, but it also affect the CO2 level according to Henry’s Law.

The reason it is called “Law” is because it has been “proven”!

“.. scientific laws describe phenomena that the scientific community has found to be provably true ..”

That means, the graph proves CO2 do not control temperature, that again proves (Man Made) Global Warming, now called “Climate Change” due to lack of … Warming is – again – debunked!