Posted on 01/16/2016 3:43:22 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper
Stinkin’ Canadian. Dang feriner, conspirin’ to come over here and replace our delicious, crispy, all-American bacon with that floppy, communist, Canadian crap. And Budweiser? Like your Budweiser? Forget it. If he’s elected, it’s nothing but that skunky Molson swill for you, my friend. Football? Banned. It’s all sticks, pucks and missing teeth from here on out. A wall on the southern border? ISIS? TB-infected Mesicans and Central Americans? Ha! A mere diversion. Trump needs to build that wall up north to keep commie Canucks like Ted Cruz out of the White House.
He’s gaining on The Donald, you see. And so finally the question of his eligibility to serve as our 45th U.S. president is fair game. Oh, sure, Ted grew up in Houston, Texas. And, oh, sure, his mother, who happened to be over the border in Canada when Ted was born, is a U.S citizen, herself born in Wilmington, Delaware, which, oh, sure, automatically makes Ted a U.S. citizen from birth. But, hey! I, the guys down at the Elks Lodge with their pocket constitutions and whatnot, and Donald Trump, who, with his own political self-interests in mind has suddenly flip-flopped on the subject, all disagree. Ted Cruz is ineligible to serve as President of the United States based upon our extreme-minority take on the phrase, “Natural-born citizen.â€
For that matter, and based upon our own arbitrary and narrow definition – I know, it’s not defined in the Constitution, but derpity derp derp anyway – some might suggest that eight of the first nine U.S. presidents should have been ineligible to serve as well. Since they were all born as British citizens in the British colonies, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, et al., should have been, one and all, constitutionally ineligible.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
If you were a citizen at the time of the adoption of the constitution you didn't have to be natural born.
I thought Cruz was supposed to be a defender of the constitution. Why are his supporters coming up with all of these frivolous arguments to defend his ineligibility?
The first 8 where “grandfathered in” by the Constitution BECAUSE the country was at its nexus. But of course the Framers wanted PURE citizens to be presidents afterwards. They DIDN’T say “only citizens” can be president, they said “only special citizens” can be president. There is NOTHING special about Cruz’s citizenship. Special citizenship was understood to be pure, unassailable, unquestionable, and NON-foreign. The FACT that Cruz’s eligibility is be questioned points to the OBVIOUSNESS of its inferiority to others. There are millions of natural born citizens in the country. Obama is not one, Cruz is not one, Rubio is not one. All of my life it was COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD that to be president you had to be born in AMERICA. Why have we walked this back? Why the desire to challenge the wisdom of the Founders? It is mind-boggling.
they were citizens at the time of the adoption of the constitution dumba55.
In his emails to the Guardian, Tribe discussed Cruz’s own approach to constitutional issues, noting that under “the kind of judge Cruz says he admires and would appoint to the supreme court - an ‘originalist’ who claims to be bound by the historical meaning of the constitution’s terms at the time of their adoption - Cruz wouldn’t be eligible because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and 90s required that someone be born on US soil to be a ‘natural born’ citizen.”
He added: “Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice for a genuine originalist. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would clearly have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.
“On the other hand, to the kind of judge that I admire and Cruz abhors - a ‘living constitutionalist’ who believes that the constitution’s meaning evolves with the needs of the time - Cruz would ironically be eligible because it no longer makes sense to be bound by so narrow and strict a definition.”
Tribe said: “There is no single, settled answer. And our supreme court has never addressed the issue.”
How embarrassing for you to post this pathetic and beyond clueless defense of Cruz.
Right. the author of this tripe is desperately trying to confuse people.
Didn’t WND lead the charge against Obama being born in Kenya? This is a really really stupid article.
Larry Tribe is incorrect on this point.
“Cruz would ironically be eligible because it no longer makes sense to be bound by so narrow and strict a definition.”
If it no longer makes sense, then amend the Constitution.
The patrilineal thesis that Tribe is espousing was indeed the rule in 1789. It is no longer, but that is not because of any 'living constitution' bullcrap.
It is because of the 14th Amendment.
Um...the Founders *specifically* included a grandfather clause specifying that those who were US citizens *at the time of the adoption of the Constitution* were eligible.
Hence, dumb Cruz-supporter argument is completely, utterly destroyed.
Really, you’d think that the people following the supposedly “constitutionalist” candidate wouldn’t fall for such simple and easy-to-refute arguments.
Already done: Amendment 14, ratified July 9, 1868.
birthers bought them upon themselves by saying one has to be born in the US on US soil and both parents must be US presidents. Wanna go down that silly path this is the result
In defining what an Article II natural born Citizen is, we do not seek to read into the Constitution that which was not intended and written there by the Framers. Despite popular belief, the Fourteenth Amendment does not convey the status of "natural born Citizen" in its text nor in its intent. Some add an implication to the actual wording of the Fourteenth Amendment by equating the amendment's "citizen" to Article II's "natural born Citizen." But nowhere does the 14th Amendment confer "natural born citizen" status. The words simply do not appear there, but some would have us believe they are implied. But the wording of the Amendment is clear in showing that it confers citizenship only and nothing more.
Neither the 14th Amendment nor Wong Kim Ark make one a Natural Born Citizen
If this is the case, then there's nobody alive who is eligible. LOL
I will respond to every time you post that lie.
The originalist view is that Cruz is not eligible because he was not born in US soil.
The libs would be more likely to side with him but probably won’t for political reasons.
In summary, he is doomed.
its early and I haven’t had coffee yet!
should be- both parents must be US residents
;)
The 14th amendment doesn't define or determine who is a natural born citizen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.