Skip to comments.Fox News Declares Ted Cruz Ineligible To Be POTUS Due To Birth In Canada [American Mother]
Posted on 03/09/2013 8:04:06 AM PST by Cold Case Posse Supporter
Now we are finally getting somewhere. Just like Obama is ineligible technically because his fathers British Nationality 'governed' his birth status in 1961, Ted Cruz is ineligible too. Fox News has confirmed it and rightly so. Sean Hannity made a huge blunder the other day and declared Ted Cruz a natural born citizen because he was born to a American mother in Canada. He was so wrong. Cruz is a 14th Amendment U.S. 'statutory' (not natural born) citizen which is something completely different than a Article 2 Section 1 Constitutional natural born Citizen which is explicitly designed only for the presidency by the framers.
You are incorrect. Child would have to be born in the US. He or she would become a naturalized citizen by virtue of having citizen parents.
Given that most of the founders themselves were grandfathered, your complaint has zero merit.
Binney also said:
“The state of the law in the United States is easily
deduced. -The notion that there is any common law
principle to naturalize the children born in foreign
countries, of native-born American father and mother,
father or mother, must be discarded. There is not and
never was any such common law principle. “
You seem to have left that part off when you posted the second part of that:
But the common law principle of allegiance, was the law of all the States at the time of the Revolution, and at the
adoption of the Constitution; and by that principle the
citizens of the United States are, with the exceptions
before mentioned, such only as are either born or made
so, born within the limits and under the urisdiction of
the United States, or naturalized by the authority of
law, either in one of the States before the Constitution,
or since that time, by virtue of an Act of the Congress
of the United States.”
Not the English common law of natural born Subject, but the common law of allegiance.
I’ve seen some of these After-birther blogs like the one you pasted up here. They carefully snip parts of the text, just the parts that “support” the claim that simply being born on the soil is all that is necessary to be a nbC.
They post an enormous volume of references, many which contradict each other if you had the time to read more than just the carefully selected snips. You just try to overwhelm and distract rather than have a focused discussion.
Last I checked Canada is pretty thinly populated.
Has there ever been someone born in America declared ineligible for the presidency on these grounds?
I know that there are some of you out there who believe that this country would be better run by judges, but that was not what the Founders had in mind.
I also like what Ive seen so far in Cruz but I also like the fact that the Founders of the Constitution designated requirements for POTUSA which they intended to keep any foreign influence, birth or otherwise, from the goal of ‘a more perfect union’. I believe the Founders spirits are not taking happily to what the current generation has done with that intent by stretching their words to include Obama. As to Cruz or any other person with a similar birth background for me it is a choice between choosing an individual, as people have done with Obama, or using the Founders intentions as argued before being specific as to ‘natural’ in the Constitution. As much as we,the USA, need people like Cruz, and there are others if allowed to come forward, we need to hold dearly the intent of the Founders and the Constitution they gave us. I go with the Founders.
And Ted Cruz didn’t have U.S. “parents” (plural) when he was born in Canada, either.
I just checked; Ted Cruz’s father didn’t become a U.S. Citizen until 2005!
So, not born on US soil and NOT born to citizen parents (plural).
Impeachment and removal by court is just not what the Founders had in mind.
I suspect many of those conservatives are birthers. They claim to respect the U.S. Constitution and want to see it applied evenly to political candidates regardless of political affiliation. In truth, birthers would bend or break the Constitution in order to fulfill their agenda of having Obama declared ineligible for the presidency and they would NEVER accept a SCOTUS ruling that declared Obama eligible.
IMHO, there is only one group of citizens whose NBC status cannot be questioned in any way: those born on U.S. soil to two citizen parents. About all others, we can make arguments for and against their eligibility for the presidency. Until the courts rule on whether or not statutory citizenship at birth qualifies as a NBC under the meaning of A2S1C5 of the Constitution, those with an agenda will shoot at any available target.
So we are throwing away all of our hopes of a Cruz’16 run solely on the word of one reporter??? More info is needed, especially since McLame was born elsewhere and was eligable to run.
Take a deep breath everyone. This FR post was the only thing i saw referencing this report.
Do you know if “birth tourism’ has caught on in Canada like it has in the US?
Birth tourism is a ticking time bomb. We haven’t seen the real affects yet.
Not sure I follow you. I’m not “complaining” about anything, just voicing an opinion.
Why do you confuse “American” with “Natural Born Citizen”?
The founders had no trouble distinguishing between the two. That’s why they made a special case for people who lived in the United States at the time the country was founded, and said that all others must be “Natural Born Citizen”.
If you grew up in a foreign country, you might have some allegiance to that country, and they wanted to avoid any possibility that the President would give deference to other countries over our own supremacy.
And whether you think Obama is NBR or not, you can’t argue that he certainly seems to prove the point that if you aren’t solidly raised to love our country, you will betray it as President.
Cruz said yesterday his father was not a citizen yet at the time of his birth. Plus he was born in Canada. Probably people said this already, just getting to the thread.
I suggest you look, instead, at the US State Department application for a Passport. The instructions list the various ways that one may claim citizenship, and those requirements for Citizenship at Birth have changed over the years.
For instance, the laws concerning Birth by One US Parent will require residency in the US, for a certain period of time after reaching the age of majority.
All “Natural Born Citizen” means is that you became a Citizen at the moment of birth, based on the laws in effect at the time of your birth. NOTHING ELSE.
No, I cited a very large chunk of a US Supreme Court opinion.
The common law definition of Natural Born Subject is what created our common law definition of Natural Born Citizen.
There are two ways to be a US citizen - birth, or naturalization. Someone naturalized is allowed to hold any office except President. For President, you must be born a US citizen. And Cruz WAS born a US citizen. As was Obama, sadly. And that is all it takes. If you are a US citizen, and you were not naturalized, then you are a NBC.
Yes, your son can be President.
Natural Born Citizen means Citizen at Birth and nothing else.
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.