The National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA), a far-right political advocacy organization, just made an extremely racist argument for why Kamala Harris can’t be President…and it also makes no sense.

They argue that the 1857 Dred Scott v. Sanford decision is the reason why Harris can’t run for President. This decision is perhaps the Supreme Court’s most infamous, as it essentially states that slaves are not U.S. citizens and thus cannot run for office.

Applying this decision to Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy as well, they argued that according to the Constitution, none of these candidates’ parents are “natural born” U.S. citizens, so they can’t run for office.

But the Dred Scott ruling applies only to people who were enslaved by the U.S—a practice formally abolished nearly a century and a half ago, if still unofficially in practice within the U.S. prison system. 

So basically they’re trying to say that all Black people are slaves, which is an incredibly racist trope and a pretty below-the-bar attempt to disqualify Harris, even for far-right conservatives.

Their argument about natural-born parents also doesn’t make sense, as Harris herself was born and raised in the U.S. She was born in Oakland, CA, and has lived here all her life.

Applying their logic to the Founding Fathers would mean that that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and more weren’t eligible to run at all and should not be counted as Presidents.

The group also tried to make the argument that Harris’ policies are equivalent to authoritarian regimes across the country, claiming that the Biden-Harris administration is somehow more racist than any foreign government.

All of it, of course, is just an excuse for them to advocate for Trump. But what does this say about the types of people Trump’s policies attract? We knew that they were racist and desperate, but this really is a new low even for them.