Posted on 09/02/2013 9:58:26 AM PDT by xzins
Was John McCain born in the US? If he had won enough electoral votes would he have become President?
Current citizenship law covers Senator Cruz’ birth circumstance:
“The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:”—8 U.S.C. § 1401
The original thinking of the Founding Fathers on this issue was codified in the Naturalization Act of 1790: “The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens”.
“Obama set the precedence that it doesnt matter.”
Obama means nothing to us
Blood or Soil
Citizenship at Birth = Natural Born Citizenship
Thanks for posting this. It saved me from having to compose a thread of my own.
Last I checked Louisiana State wasn’t in Congress debating the 1790’s naturalization act.
On the other hand, references to British law and Blackstone WERE there as testified to by the record itself.
“Hypocrisy is what will plague a Cruz run for President. Many birthers painted conservatives into a box on the issue. Cruz will constantly be hounded to denounce those conservatives. It could become a distraction, an opportunity at ridicule. The mistake was in how the birthers mishandled the situation. Next time ask questions, create doubt. But dont make accusations.”
We just have to be prepared for when the media sticks in Canada and Cuba into every mention of Cruz. Because you know that’s what they will do.
did you get your law degree from the matchbook cover school of law and shoe repair?
I was a Freeper long before you, and I've been part of the Obama debates on Free Republic from their inception.
In the same way as you ignore other facts, you don't look up simple ones like these before making off-the-wall comments.
Source, please.
That particular interpretation has never been established in any court of law. The term remains "ambiguous".
In your mind, perhaps.
But not in law.
It's going down hard for the Obama-birthers. The facts are causing more "kicking against the pricks".
I'm hoping they'll come around. Some though, see intransigence even when wrong to be a matter of honor...or saving face...or something.
I'm fairly sure that others are planted disrupters.
So, are you claiming to be a lawyer. Did I get that right!???
I was a Freeper long before you, and I’ve been part of the Obama debates on Free Republic from their inception.
Wrong, I was a freeper before your listed date...just because my date shows later does not mean it is when I arrived and registered. I had a registration change.
second if you were part of the eligibility discussions then you would be aware of my and others lengthy discussions and debates and the results/conclusions of those discussions and debates
I wish you well, but you are not making points for your agenda.
Cruz actually was a published editor of Harvard Law Review graduating with a magna cum laude degree in law. He actually did law clerk for chief justice, conservative, William Rehnquist. He really was called “off the charts brilliant” by enemy liberal, law professor Alan Dershowitz. He really was editor of the Latino Harvard Law Review. He really did argue before the Supreme Court scores of cases. He really was solicitor general of Texas, successfully defending conservative positions at every turn.
He really is a Hispanic who is conservative and able to disprove the notion that Hispanics reject conservatism.
So, there is nothing shallow at all about Ted Cruz. And when it comes to the Constitution, he is a constitutional lawyer for years now.
So, are you claiming to be a lawyer. Did I get that right!???
I think you have a reading comprehension problem.
Adios I have no more time to waste with you on this lovely holiday....
“The original thinking of the Founding Fathers on this issue was codified in the Naturalization Act of 1790: The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens.”
Your ignorance is on display or you know better and on purpose are trying to deceive.
the Naturalization Act of 1790 was REPEALED in 1795 and the words “natural” & “born” were removed. Congress made an error and then fixed it. Unless Ted Cruz was born between 1790 and 1795 the Naturalization Act of 1790 won’t be of any help to his cause.
You couldn’t have been on Free Republic “long before” me, because it only opened to the public a year before me, and I lurked for part of that time.
So, you changed your registration in 2000, 2.5 years after my registration.
What was your original Freeper name?
That was uncalled for.
Xzins: So, are you claiming to be a lawyer. Did I get that right!???
RS: I think you have a reading comprehension problem. Adios I have no more time to waste with you on this lovely holiday....
Sounds to me like you have left the field for some reason....caught, perhaps, in a misrepresentation.
see #98
I believe that you have hit the nail on the head there.
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.