It Begins: Attorney Ann Coulter Says Ted Cruz Not Eligible

Article II ^ | November 13, 2015 | no author given

[firebrand]

First ballot access challenge.

That's all it says.

[AFret.]

Only one parent is required being a citizen.

I agree that she can pass citizenship..but NBC is the requirement...

[Yosemitest]

It has NOTHING to do with the LAW.

"Children born in the US of illegal alien parents don't have to go thru the naturalization process;"

WHAT DOES "illegal alien parents" have to dos with this debate ?
NOTHING !

For those who actually want to know THE LAW, HERER IS THE LAW as legislated and APPROVED BY CONGRESS according to the United States Constitution:

The ABC's of Immigration: Citizenship Rules for People Born Outside the United States
by Greg Siskind
All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States (with the very minor exception of certain children of diplomatic personnel).
This is perhaps the only simple rule of US citizenship.
One of the most complicated areas of US citizenship law involves the passage of citizenship to children born outside the US to one or more US citizen parents.
While naturalized US citizens are treated like natural born citizens, which includes those who are deemed citizens even when born outside the US, in almost every respect, there is one important office that only natural born citizens can hold - - the presidency
(though expect to see efforts in Congress to change this if Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger decides to run for President).
Also, a person who is a citizen from birth cannot be denaturalized (though denaturalization rarely ever occurs).

The rules determining when such children are citizens are extremely detailed, and vary a great deal depending on when the child was born since the laws changed several times in the 20th century.

What are the rules for people born before May 24, 1934?

Persons born abroad before May 24, 1934 to a US citizen father who had resided in the US at any point before the birth are considered US citizens at birth.
The status of the mother did not matter unless the child was born out of wedlock.
There were numerous legal challenges to this rule, claiming that it violates equal protection by treating the children born to US citizen women different than those born to US citizen men.
The issue was never fully resolved by the courts, but in 1994, Congress passed a law retroactively granting citizenship at birth to children born abroad to US citizen women.

In 1940, Congress passed a law making illegitimate children born abroad to US citizen women citizens if the mother had resided in the US.
However, under this law, if the child was legitimated by the foreign national father before his or her eighteenth birthday, the child would not be considered a citizen.
In 1998, the Supreme Court issued an opinion upholding the requirement that a child born out of wedlock to a US citizen woman be legitimated before his or her eighteenth birthday.
The decision was reaffirmed in the 2001 US Supreme Court decision Nguyen v. INS which held that differing requirements for out-of-wedlock children of US citizen men versus US citizen women are constitutions.

The US citizen parent must have resided in the US prior to the birth.
This residence can be in the US itself, or in certain US territories after certain dates.
The residence can have been while the parent was a minor, and there is no length of time for which the parent must have resided in the US.

What are the rules for people born between May 24, 1934 and January 13, 1941?

In 1934, Congress passed a law allowing US citizen parents, regardless of their gender, to pass citizenship to their children born abroad.
If both parents were citizens, only one was required to have resided in the US, and as with the previous law, there was no required length of time that the parent must have resided in the US.

However, if one parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national, the child would lose their citizenship if they did not either reside in the US for the five years immediately prior to their eighteenth birthday or, within six months of turning 21, take an oath of allegiance to the US.
These requirements were gradually relaxed between 1934 and 1940.

Illegitimate children born aboard between 1934 and 1941 became citizens under the general provision, and because the child was considered to have only one parent, no requirements were imposed that could result in the loss of citizenship.

What are the rules for people born between January 14, 1941 and December 23, 1952?

As before, children born abroad to two US citizens, with one parent having resided in the US, the child was a US citizen at birth.
No further action was required to maintain citizenship.

When one parent was a citizen and the other a foreign national, however, the rules changed substantially.
To pass citizenship, the citizen parent must have resided in the US for at least 10 years before the birth of the child, and at least five of those years had to be after the parent turned 16.
Because this rule made it impossible for parents under 21 to pass citizenship, in 1946 the requirement was amended to create an exception for parents who had served in World War Two.

Originally, for children born during this period to retain US citizenship, they had to reside in the US for five years between the age of 13 and 21.
However, an exception was made for children of US citizens who were employed abroad by the US government or a US company.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother who met the residence requirements were automatically citizens, and they retained US citizenship even if legitimated by the foreign national father.
For a child born out of wedlock to a US citizen father, to obtain US citizenship the child must have been legitimated before the age of 21.

What are the rules for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986?

Again, children born abroad to two US citizen parents were US citizens at birth, as long as one of the parents resided in the US at some point before the birth of the child.

When one parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national, the US citizen parent must have resided in the US for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child, with five of the years after the age of 14.
An exception for people serving in the military was created by considering time spent outside the US on military duty as time spent in the US.

While there were initially rules regarding what the child must do to retain citizenship, amendments since 1952 have eliminated these requirements.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother were US citizens if the mother was resident in the US for a period of one year prior to the birth of the child.
Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen father acquired US citizenship only if legitimated before turning 21.

What are the rules for people born on or after November 14, 1986?

Children born abroad to two US citizen parents, one of whom has resided in the US prior to the birth of the child, continue to be US citizens at birth, and need take no special actions to retain citizenship.

Children born to one citizen parent and one foreign national will obtain citizenship at birth if the citizen parent resided in the US for five years before the birth, with two of those years after the age of 14.
The child does not need to take any special action to retain US citizenship.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother will be US citizens if the mother resided in the US for one year prior to the birth of the child.
Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen father will acquire US citizenship if the following conditions are met:


• There is an established blood relationship between the father and the child,
  
  
• The father was a US citizen at the time of the birth,
  
  
• The father has agreed to financially support the child until it is 18, and
  
  
• Before the child is 18 it is legitimated, or the father acknowledges paternity in a document signed under oath

While these are general rules, Congress has continually amended and revised many laws relating to citizenship, particularly those dealing with the requirements for retention of citizenship.
If a person believes that they have a claim to US citizenship, they should consult with an attorney for a full examination of that possibility.

[EternalVigilance]

It becomes a matter of standing.

We learned with Obama that according to the courts virtually no American has anyplace to stand.

[Theo]

Trump supporters all start sounding the same. Their Trumpish dismissal of others is just wearying.

The thing is, Cruz is not running for either AG or SCOTUS. He is running for President. And he’s running to win.

Maybe I should start saying on Trump threads, “Yeah, Trump would make a good press secretary within President Cruz’s administration.”

I understand Cruz supporters — we support a man who is principled, who is smart, who communicates well, who is a strong constitutionalist, who has a proven track record, who gets things done, who has meaningful endorsements. What I don’t get is those who are such fanatical Trump supporters, to the point where they dismiss anyone else as entirely unviable, but who can’t really say why Trump is better other than he is brash and has lately been saying ear-tickling things.

I’m just tired of Trump and his followers. We don’t need a brash reality TV star. We need a strong conservative leader.

[freedomjusticeruleoflaw]

It was the yelling that convinced me.

[Theo]

“Trump is the only candidate taking on the GOPee directly.”

You really don’t think Cruz has been taking on the GOPe? Have you ever heard the term “Washington Cartel”? That’s a term Cruz coined, to describe the GOPe etc. His staunchest enemies are members of the GOPe.

That you see Trump as “the only candidate taking on the GOPee directly” tells me that you’ve dismissed Cruz too casually.

[Yosemitest]

Call 1-800-WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH !

[freedomjusticeruleoflaw]

Childish. I’m sure Ted loves that.

[kabar]

"Children born in the US of illegal alien parents don't have to go thru the naturalization process;"

THAT IS THE LAW. You are missing the point repeatedly--maybe on purpose. The issue is the definition of NBC and eligibility to be President under the Constitution. The courts have never ruled on what the definition means.

Yes, Cruz received his American citizenship thru his Amcit mother. The US-born children of illegal aliens, green card holders, and tourists receive their American citizenship thru birthright citizenship. The criterion that if you do not require naturalization then you are a NBC means that all of these children are eligible to be President. It is specious and has not been tested in the courts.

Do you believe that the US born children of illegal aliens, tourists, and green card holders are eligible to be President under the Constitution?

Have you read the Tribe/Olson Natural Citizen memo?

As someone who has professional and personal experience with this issue, I would like to see this issue decided sooner rather than later by the courts. It has never been adjudicated.

[kabar]

Every president to date was either a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution in 1789 or born in the United States; of those in the latter group, every president except two (Chester A. Arthur and Barack Obama) had two U.S.-citizen parents.

[chris37]

You paint with far too broad a brush. I support Trump, and I support Cruz. Both men have their flaws. Neither are perfect.

Incidentally, as to the topic of this thread, Cruz is unquestionably eligible.

[kabar]

Challenges to Cruz ‘natural-born’ citizenship to be heard in NH next week State Ballot Law Commission gives notice of Nov. 24 hearings on Cruz, Sanders eligibility

Two challenges to U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz’s eligibility to serve as president have been filed with the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission, both alleging that Cruz does not meet the requirement that the president must be a natural-born citizen as defined by the constitution.

ruz’s campaign says the question has been answered numerous times, including in a finding earlier this year by two solicitors general – one a Democrat and one a Republican – that Cruz is a natural-born citizen because his mother was a U.S. citizen. As is well known, Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada, while his father was working there for an oil company.

While Cruz’s father is a naturalized citizen, his mother is a natural-born citizen who was born in Delaware.

The New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission issued formal notice on Monday that the challenges to Cruz’s eligibility will be heard on Nov. 24.

There has never been an official challenge specific to Cruz’s eligibility to run for president filed with an adjudicatory body until now, Cruz campaign spokesman Rick Tyler said.

Also schedule to be reviewed by the six-member bipartisan commission that day is a challenge to U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ eligibility to appear on the New Hampshire Democratic primary ballot. A complaint alleging that Sanders is ineligible was filed last week by attorney Andrew Martin of Illinois. The series of hearings are scheduled to begin at 9 a.m.

Christopher Booth of Concord, New Hampshire, and Cameron Elliott of Pennsylvania filed separate challenges to Cruz, arguing that although Cruz’s mother is an American citizen, Cruz is ineligible because he was born in Canada, outside of the jurisdiction of the United States.

Elliott, a self-described progressive activist, pointed out that Cruz is a citizen only by virtue of an act of Congress that allows those born of American citizens but outside of the U.S. to be considered “natural born” citizens. The constitution, however, says that only “natural born” citizens are allowed to serve as president.

A law passed in 1790 said that “children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens.”

Elliott argues that Cruz is not a natural-born citizen as defined by the constitution, but rather as defined by a federal law passed by Congress after the constitution was adopted. That, he argues, makes Cruz ineligible.

Booth is an undeclared Concord resident who has run for numerous state offices, including the U.S. Senate and mayor of Concord.

He makes a similar argument, writing that “those who are citizens by virtue of an act passed by Congress – that is, laws, statutes, or acts, of naturalization, are naturalized citizens. While (those) who have been born within the jurisdiction of the United States are naturally citizens, natural born citizens, constitutionally, irregardless (sic) of any congressional act.”

Cruz’s campaign had no comment on the challenges. A spokesman said the campaign has no plans to file responses to the paperwork filed by Booth and Mitchell.

“The commission will conduct the hearing and we’ll await its decision,” campaign spokesman Rick Tyler said.

Cruz himself has spoken often on the issue, but not recently, insisting that the question is settled.

Earlier this year, former solicitors general Neal Katyal, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, and Paul Clement, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, wrote in the Harvard Law Review:

“Despite the happenstance of birth across the border, there is no question that Sen. Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a ‘natural born citizen’ within the meaning of the Constitution.”

They said Cruz’s situation is similar to those of former presidential candidate U.S. Sen. John McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone; U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater, who was born in Arizona before it became a state, and Michigan Gov. George Romney, who was born in Mexico to U.S. citizens.

"There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle," Clement and Katyal wrote. "The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better."

Several other legal scholars, including Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, have also concluded that Cruz is a natural-born citizen as defined by the constitution, and eligible.

“The facts are clear,” Cruz said earlier this year. “I was born in Calgary. My parents, as legal matter, my mother is an American citizen by birth. And it’s been federal law for over two centuries that the child of an American citizen born abroad is a citizen by birth, a natural born citizen.”

[WENDLE]

Here is the pathway. 1. New Hampshire election committee denies his registration. 2. Cruz moves for mandamus in Federal district court ( federal question is Article II) — DENIED. Cruz appeals to the 1st circuit court of appeals — DENIED — appeal to SCOTUS Cert granted SCOTUS HEARS CASE. ok?

[WENDLE]

So obama could have been born in KENYA? Your wrong.

[WENDLE]

The united states passed a law that for all purposes a person born on a US military base was “Natural Born”. McCain is not an issue and there is no analogy there.

[X-spurt]

Come on now, quit playing the Village Idiot.

Read the source and other posts here, there are only two types of citizenship, NBC and Naturalized.

A parent and in particularly the mother who is a US citizen, passes NBC onto her or their children, regardless where the birth took place.

Naturalization requires the PERSON to request such citizenship. Did Cruz request Naturalized citizenship? No! As he was already a Natural Born Citizen.

[JimRed]

Get it out of the way now, so there’s no confusion late in the game.

[X-spurt]

You need to read post 152.

There will be no denial from New Hampshire. Too much basing on What IF to have any weight.

Your NH heros are pretty far from conservative to have been considered here and their argument is in opposition to how the Law was originally written and is now written.

[mlo]

"The issue I raise is that if you use the criterion that a NBC under the Constitution means any US citizen who does not require naturalization to become a citizen, then this opens the door for the US born children of illegal aliens, green card holders, and tourists. All such children are US citizens at birth."

Yes, they are eligible. Which just means they aren't legally disqualified from office. They'd still have to win the election. There doesn't have to be legal disqualification against everyone we don't want to win.

[jpsb]

You need medical attention, you are stark raving mad. Have a nice day /s