Can Bill Clinton run for president of France?

Question

Bill Clinton says in an interview (Bill Clinton on running for political office again) :

Because I was born in Arkansas, which is part of Louisiana Purchase, any person anywhere in the world that was born in a place that ever was a part of the French empire, if you move to, if you live in France for six months and speak French you can run for president of France

Is it true or just a joke ?

I think since he denied having an affair he probably fails some French presidential law on gross moral turpitude - or at least gross discourtesy to a women. — none, Sep 27 '12 at 16:01
@mgb - OTOH, that makes him immenently qualified to be Prime Minister of Italy. ;-) — T.E.D., Sep 27 '12 at 17:35
@T.E.D. - But only one intern - I don't think that qualifies him to even be a local councilor in Italy — none, Sep 27 '12 at 21:02
@T.E.D. - wasn't Dominique (sp?) Strauss Kahn considered to be the top candidate to run for French Presidency? — DVK, Oct 02 '12 at 14:11
@mgb - Elizabeth Gracen. Paula Jones. Jennifer Flowers. I am probably failing to recall some names since presidential porn isn't my main area of study :) — DVK, Oct 02 '12 at 14:12
@DVK - There have been reports of many more, even up to 2008. So personsally, I think he could make it in Italy. :-) — T.E.D., Oct 02 '12 at 16:29

score 29 · Accepted Answer · edited Sep 27 '12 at 15:59

In short:

It was true until 2006. Now he can still run for president of France, but through the standard way : he can acquire French nationality through naturalization (like anyone) and run for president as a French citizen!

More precisely :

This article (Sorry, Bill Clinton. You can't be president of France or Ireland) explains deeply why :

Clinton likely got the Louisiana Purchase idea from political scientist Patrick Weil, who wrote an open letter to him in the New York Times in 2001 suggesting it:
Under Section 5 of Article 21-19 of the French civil code, citizens of states or territories over which France has ever exercised sovereignty or extended a mandate or protectorate may apply immediately for naturalization, without the normal five-year residency requirement.
<p>Arkansas, where you were born, was once part of French Louisiana. And as a naturalized French citizen, you would have the same full rights as all other French citizens. That includes running for the presidency.</em></p>
Unfortunately for Clinton, and his fellow Louisiana territory residents, Section 5 has been abrogé and doesn't appear in the current version of the code. According to a footnote in a 2004 New York Review of Books article, "After Weil's article made this provision of the French nationality law notorious, the French parliament abolished it in on July 24, 2006."

Here is the french civil code extract (Article 21-19):

Peut être naturalisé sans condition de stage :

5° Le ressortissant ou ancien ressortissant des territoires et des Etats sur lesquels la France a exercé soit la souveraineté, soit un protectorat, un mandat ou une tutelle ;

Good answer, but it says "According to a footnote in a 2004 New York Review of Books article, 'After Weil's article made this provision of the French nationality law notorious, the French parliament abolished it in on July 24, 2006.'" How can a footnote in a 2004 article refer to something that happened in 2006? Presumably it's a typo -- do you have a link to the Review article? — litlnemo, May 04 '14 at 11:03
Good point. The link is just above the quoted text : http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/09/26/sorry_bill_clinton_you_cant_be_president_of_france_or_ireland — JBE, May 05 '14 at 07:25

score 6 · Answer 2 · edited Jun 17 '20 at 09:02

Its true that he said it. However, the statement itself was not true. (Sorry, French Clinton fans!)

He apparently got that idea from an open letter a political scientist wrote to him in the New York Times back in 2001 suggesting the idea. The problem there, however, is that after that letter brought attention to the Louisiana Purchase loophole, the French parliament went on to abolish the provision in 2006.

He could still try for President of the UN General Assembly I suppose.

IcameIsawItooksomepictures · Answer 3 · 2023-12-11T19:00:38.160

-2

In response to JBE's answer, Clinton could argue that the rule change in 2006 would not apply to his eligibility to run for President of France since his eligibility (if any) occurred prior to the rule change. Any rule change with retroactive effect would constitute ex post facto legal application.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ex_post_facto

According to Wikipedia, in France, so-called "lois rétroactives" (retroactive laws) are technically prohibited by Article 2 of the Code Civil, which states that: "Legislation provides only for the future; it has no retrospective operation."

See: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/download/pdf/legiOrKali?id=LEGITEXT000006070721.pdf&size=1,3%20Mo&pathToFile=/LEGI/TEXT/00/00/06/07/07/21/LEGITEXT000006070721/LEGITEXT000006070721.pdf&title=Code%20civil

While Wikipedia goes on to state that "[i]n practice, however, since the Code Civil does not have the status of constitutional legislation and can therefore be overruled by subsequent laws, [and that] the Conseil Constitutionnel has determined that retroactive laws can be passed within certain limits," these typically apply, according to Wikipedia, to tax or financial legislation.

See: https://web.archive.org/web/20130123221048/https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/conseil-constitutionnel/francais/a-la-une/janvier-2013-la-retroactivite-fiscale-dans-la-jurisprudence-du-conseil-constitutionnel.135573.html

Clinton could argue that tax and financial legislation, neither includes, nor is related to, laws concerning eligibility for running for President of France. Indeed law regarding running for President of France is well outside the rubric of tax and financial legislation.

Furthermore, since the French Constitution provides for the election of a President, the changes in the civil code should be read in the context of Constitutional law. As such, Clinton could argue that such context strongly militates against the application of the law change ex post facto.

In sum, if Clinton had eligibility to run for President prior to the change in the civil code, it appears that he would have a bone fide tenable argument for his present eligibility, notwithstanding the rule change given that such rule change cannot apply to him ex post facto.

In conclusion, the law governing this matter, and Clinton's eligibility, is unclear to me.

edited Dec 11 '23 at 19:00

answered Dec 11 '23 at 05:47

IcameIsawItooksomepictures

9
3

1

Sources would improve your answer. – Lars Bosteen Dec 11 '23 at 06:33
3

The core of the question is the provision in Section 5 of Article 21-19: may apply immediately for naturalization, without the normal five-year residency requirement. Did Clinton apply before the provision was abolished? No, thus the matter is settled. – Mark Johnson Dec 11 '23 at 07:05
1

"in France, so-called "lois rétroactives" (retroactive laws) are technically prohibited by Article 2 of the Code Civil, which states that: "Legislation provides only for the future; it has no retrospective operation."" is not accurate, because some laws, when they benefit a large part of the population, are retroactive, and are voted by both houses then the constitutional council validates them. Laws that would penalize the public can't be retroactive. – OldPadawan Dec 11 '23 at 10:08
I'm going by what the plain text says. – IcameIsawItooksomepictures Dec 11 '23 at 19:10
@Mark Johnson: No, (at least not based on your assertion) if ex post facto still applied. – IcameIsawItooksomepictures Dec 11 '23 at 19:20
If reputable polls disclosed that Clinton was/would be a popular Presidential candidate for France among those both qualified and likely to vote, he could also argue that any exception to the general rule of non-retroactivity, such as "when they benefit a large part of the population" as claimed by OldPadawan, is not applicable because his candidacy would likely benefit a large part of the population, who have a constitutional right to vote (suffrage). – IcameIsawItooksomepictures Dec 11 '23 at 19:30
The link in the first answer (Sorry, Bill Clinton. You can't be president of France or Ireland) no longer works. This one hopefully does. https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/09/26/sorry-bill-clinton-you-cant-be-president-of-france-or-ireland/ – IcameIsawItooksomepictures Dec 11 '23 at 21:37
Instead of down voting, could you refute the legal argument? Thanks. BTW, I reached out to the author of the article to determine whether he had considered the (in)applicability of the ex post facto argument and whether he had obtained legal advice in reaching hius conclusion that Clinton was not eligible. – IcameIsawItooksomepictures Dec 11 '23 at 22:30
The second downvote was from me for the reason given in my comment. – Mark Johnson Dec 11 '23 at 22:46
Your understanding is that ex post facto would apply only if Clinton had satisfied applicable eligibility requirements prior to 2006 but then decided to run for President of France AFTER 2006? – IcameIsawItooksomepictures Dec 12 '23 at 01:12
The quoted article does state in the last sentence that "[a]fter Weil’s article made this provision of the French nationality law notorious, the French parliament abolished it in on July 24, 2006." Ostensibly, it did this to prevent Clinton and those similarly situated from running; however, I still remain unconvinced because the law that was changed appears to deal directly with the eligibility requirements themselves, and that therefore Clinton would be entitled to be grandfathered in. – IcameIsawItooksomepictures Dec 12 '23 at 01:23

Can Bill Clinton run for president of France?

3 Answers3