So you think they would have approved of birth tourism?
If you believe that, then it isn't the founder's stupidity I would be concerned with.
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.
ROTFLMAO!
Preach it, bro.
“At the time of the Revolution the common law of England was “thrown off”..oh sure, some individual states still adhered to it. That was the only law they knew and there was no central government in place yet...”
No. We are still a common law country. That is why court cases matter. Our common law began to diverge from Great Britain with independence, but we were and remain a common law country.
“Being a sovereign nation, our new government looked to international law.”
Nope. On the matter of citizenship, we have always been a ‘birth in the US’ sort of place. The losers in the WKA case argued that a century of common law should have been overturned and that the US should use roman law as its basis, and that idea was laughed out of court.
And if Kansas58 knew what the f*** he was talking about, he could explain why Aldo Mario Bellei was born a citizen of the United States, yet had his citizenship stripped away because he didn't live here.
Obviously a natural born citizen couldn't have his citizenship stripped away for failing to live here, so it pretty much demonstrates that being born a citizen is not the same thing as being a "natural born citizen."
I started this with NO personal preference at all. It would have been fine by me if the Framers had said "nobody but people born on US soil of citizen parents."
But that's not what they said.
In any event, you're right... sort of.
I DON'T like your interminable birther nonsense, because it DOES contradict my own personal preference, which is to respect the Founding Fathers and the Constitution that THEY wrote.
Not you. The FOUNDING FATHERS.
In my opinion, if Cruz’s parents were both US citizens at the time of his birth, and if they had both resided at some point within the US, then Cruz would likely be a “natural born citizen under the original intent of the US Constitution.
************
Just a little info regarding Cruz, his parents and their divorce.
Rafael Cruz came to the US fleeing from Cuba in 1957. Landed in Austin Tx worked and got a degree from UT, met and married Cruz’s mother. They moved to Canada where Ted Cruz was born and resided nearing his fourth birthday when his mother and he moved back to Houston. His parents were separated but not divorced at that time. They reunited and divorced later. Rafael Cruz became a US citizen in 2005. He currently is a pastor in the North Dallas area but I can’t tell you which church.
Here are a some Cruz articles from various print media of which many wash the same info over.
http://www.texastribune.org/2012/08/13/texplainer-could-canadian-born-ted-cruz-be-preside/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/who-is-ted-cruz/2012/08/01/gJQAqql8OX_blog.html
“The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.”
The US Supreme Court spent half of the WKA decision showing that NBC = NBS. It made it excruciatingly clear that those born of alien parents were still natural born citizens.
“It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.”
Repeat: “The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.”
You speak for yourself, and very few others.
You have not one single, noted legal authority to back up your claims.
Not a single conservative leader agrees with you.
Not a single Member of Congress agrees with you.
Not a single Judge agrees with you.
You have misinterpreted the law and history.
So you think they would have approved of birth tourism?
If you believe that, then it isn't the founder's stupidity I would be concerned with.
Exactly Jeff. We are adhering the Constitution, yet mocked because we refuse to buy this birther nonsense.
They are now fighting a battle against their own because they don’t like the fact Obama was elected.
You have not one living legal authority on your side.
NO judge
NO conservative leader
No immigration attorney
NO Member of Congress
Oh.. and as far as using the word "tolerated" goes, yes, I said it, and I'll say it again.
Those who run public forums, in my opinion, should have stopped tolerating the birther nonsense after it became clear how much nonsense they were putting out. Because it is absolute nonsense, it undermines the Constitution, and it makes conservatives look bad. It makes us look like a bunch of conspiracy kooks who can't even read a court case accurately.
Actually, those who run quite a few public forums did make that decision. RedState won't tolerate birthers. Mark Levin won't tolerate birthers. Rush Limbaugh won't tolerate birthers.
You have already lost this fight.
You know you have lost it.
NOBODY in any position of authority gives your point of view any weight at all.
You are on the lunatic fringe.
Because I want agreement on the principles.
You seriously overestimate how significant the birther demographic is. It's tiny and not statistically significant when it comes to actual voting. If Ted Cruz runs for President in a general election, it isn't going to make that much difference if birthers pout and stay home. Yes, every vote counts. But big picture, birtherism is a pretty fringe movement. Unless Cruz were to run in defiance of some future court decision that declared him ineligible, the extent to which people would actually vote on this issue is likely so small as to not be measurable.
No, it isn't hard to grasp, but you certainly need more information than you currently have to grasp it properly.
Cruz is exactly like Aldo Mario Bellei. Had he remained outside of the United States, he could have had his citizenship stripped from him, exactly the way Aldo Mario Bellei had his citizenship stripped from him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_v._Bellei
Do you think a "natural born citizen" could have his citizenship stripped away for not living here?
No? There's the difference.
There is nothing that Mr. Rogers says that is "Exactly. Damn. Right."
He shares that trait with you.
“I really want to know if Judges are always right!”
Well, as a practical matter, when all 50 states, and all 535 members of Congress, and every DA and every court in the country agree on something, then it is safe to say that is the official position of the US government.
Has Utah, or Arizona, or Alabama or Oklahoma banned Obama from the ballot? Nope. Has a single DA anywhere taken up the birther cause? Nope. You’re batting 0/535 in Congress. In hundreds of cases, you’ve never won at any level.
If you cannot convince a single state out of 50 to take up your standard, your views just are not shared by many people...
Wait, didn’t you just mock the Supreme Court for ruling that blacks were property. Now you cite some obscure case that does not define “natural born citizen.”
It’s all conjecture.
NO COURT IN THE LAND WOULD RULE CRUZ OR RUBIO INELIGIBLE.
Or, do you think it's possible that they agree with me that they have no role to play in the selection of our presidents?
The Constitution makes it clear that our presidents are to be selected by the electors.
If you think the electors made a mistake (which is possible), then there are procedures for impeachment. The House of Representatives (not any court) has the "sole" power of impeachment. And, if you think that the House is making a mistake in not impeaching a president, what then? Shouldn't you be able to go to court and have a judge order the House to impeach? Why, of course. We can't permit the House to make (in your judgment) a mistake when it's their duty to impeach, can we? Isn't it the Supreme Court's job to make sure no one in this country makes any mistaken decisions?
There's another case for Orly. Take the Congress to court!!! And, if the Supreme Court refuses to correct the House's mistake, then take the Supreme Court to court. Since Orly might have a conflict, we could hire Larry Klayman for that case.
Please, listen to what the judiciary is trying to tell you folks. It's not their job to pick or remove presidents.
“If you want someone to read your message, post it in small enough pieces that people won’t just skip the entire thing as I just did.”
You won’t ever read it anyways, because you know it says you are wrong. But I post it for those who are willing to think, and learn, and find out what the courts have already written...
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.