Posted on 08/11/2013 2:54:35 PM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
Potential 2016 presidential contender Donald Trump spoke to ABC's Jonathan Karl Sunday morning and reignited the birther issue that he helped spark back in 2011, questioning the legitimacy of Barack Obama's birth certificate and wondering whether Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada, was eligible to president. "Was there a birth certificate?" Trump asked. "You tell me. Some people say that was not his birth certificate. I'm saying I don't know. Nobody knows. And you don't know, either, Jonathan. You're a smart guy, you don't know, either." "I'm pretty convinced he was born in the United States," Karl said. "Ah! Pretty convinced," Trump said, and rolled over Karl's objections that he was 100% sure Obama was an American citizen. "Pretty sure is not acceptable." Trump made Obama's birth certificate a major issue in his aborted 2012 run for the GOP nomination, ultimately leading to Obama releasing his longform birth certificate. Karl asked Trump if the Canadian-born Cruz was eligible for the office. (Cruz's mother is an American citizen.) "If he was born in Canada, then perhaps not," Trump said. "That will be ironed out. I don't know the circumstances. If he says he was born in Canada, that's his thing."
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
People tend to be emotional and they feel insulted and snubbed when they are told that they or a loved one are not entitled to the coveted words Natural Born to describe their American citizenship. These words only applies to Presidential eligibility and nothing else. A citizen is a citizen except when becoming the U.S. Head of State, the President, then more stringent measures are required for the security of the nation and protection of all citizens.
“Natural born is not a citizenship status , it is a job requirement.”
Bravo! A Job Requirement not a citizenship status. Exactly a very good definition of descriptive term Natural Born.
So we’re right back where we started....
“And yet not one person has ever been able to find one example of a Civics text book from any period that supports your view. Why do you think that is?”
I believe only one of the accepted contemporary references for that era contains the exception for people born outside the US, and includes the provision of “in service of the country”.
I think it was intended for diplomats and military that wouldn’t be citizens of the host country. So, there would be no conflict of interest.
I don’t buy it. A baby born to an American mom is eligible. I wish there were about 535 “foreign nationals” as patriotic, and as *qualified* as Ted Cruz in Congress. Bob
” A baby born to an American mom is eligible.”
Not if he is born in a foreign sovereignty to a foreign national father. The only thing his American mom made him eligible for is the Senate or House of Representatives as a Citizen. For Article 2 Section 1, it takes more than a Citizen, it takes a natural born Citizen.
So What?
Does that mean I'm (and others) are liars?
We actually are a nation of Laws......not Men. Ted Cruz is a good man.........but he's not a Natural Born Citizen. So......why leave yourself open to the eventual aggravation?
Not necessarily... Merely that what you claim is not supported by any evidence.
The Presidential line of succession includes Speaker of the House. Surely they’d have to conform to your definition of NBC as well, right?
You don't consider extant copies of the "Law of Nations", published in the 18th century as proof of the definition of the term at the time the Constitution was ratified?
You don't consider as proof the fact that the eligibility clause in [Article II; Section 1] of the U.S. Constitution is proof that the requirements for the Commander in Chief were different from other Constitutional offices......and the fact that the framers "sun-setted" it for future generations?
Your argument lacks much credibility.........
Whay does the Great One Levin say that Cruz is eligible then?
And his situation was covered - completely - until Leo Donofrio exposed it.
Arthur lived the lie till his death. Seems to be a trend...
No, he is a dual citizen - by statute until he turns 18 and must renounce one.
The only former Brits legitimately eligible to be President died off around 200 years ago.
But we appear to have a currently eligible Brit in office now. Unless anyone can find where Obama filled out form RN and filed it with a British official.
RN
His parents had to file paper work for him to be a Citizen. Had they not done that - no citizenship.
This is the difference with a NATURAL born citizen. No paperwork ever, every needed. Never, none.
The citizenship is ‘natural’ and no man made law is needed to affirm it. And no paperwork is needed.
Maybe the "Great One" ain't so great....after all! Please don't get me wrong. I love Ted Cruz and wish I were wrong on this...............but I'm not!
My grandson is a dual citizen - he is a British Citizen and an American Citizen. He was born in England with a British mother and an American father. It was up to them to determine what they wanted to do about citizenship. He was made a British citizen by the mother and my son went to the American Embassy the day he was born and registered him as an American Citizen. He is not a naturalized American Citizen, he is a natural born American Citizen. He was issued an American Passport that day. When he arrives in this country, he gets in the American custom line. If his mother comes to this country, she gets in the foreign custom line.
Because he has dual citizenship, if he ran for public office in Britain, depending on the office, he would likely have to give up his American Citizenship so he would have allegiance to only one country, Britain. The same would be true if he ran for public office here, based on the requirement for that office.
His desire is to go to college in this country and he can do that easily because he is an American Citizen.
He is a teen ager and right now, he would like to live in an American Academy store as Britain doesn't have a huge store like Academy devoted to sports. He wears Houston Astros, Houston Rockets, and Dallas Cowboy shirts and jackets to his private school in England. He was in Miami for a tennis school this past month.
Thanks for posting the Law of Nations citation. That book is one of the sources considered authoritative by the Supreme Court.
Another one is Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England. It has the exception for children to born abroad to citizen parents. But, some contend that the framers rejected Blackstone in favor of Vattel’s definition.
I hope the courts rule against your position. After allowing the Amoeba to run, it would be preposterous to disallow Cruz. That would be the Democrats’ wet dream, I concede. Bob
The Supreme Court made a distinction between natural-born citizens and natural-born subjects in 1830. You can only be one (by Treaty) and not both. The point is that citizenship status naturally follows the status of the father and the allegiance of the parents. In order to be a natural-born citizen and thus be eligible for the office of president, the father would have to be a U.S. citizen and the parents would have to have allegiance to the United States. If the mother maintains allegiance to Great Britain, and the child holds dual citizenship, then he simply is not a natural-born citizen of the U.S., the reason because it would require the operation of some other form of law to determine citizenship status. No such determinations are necessary for a person who fits the Supreme Court’s definition of 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.