Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Ted Cruz a Natural Born Citizen... of Canada?

Posted on 05/21/2013 9:52:10 AM PDT by Ray76

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-369 next last
To: Ray76

Is Ted Cruz a Natural Born Citizen... of Canada?

*************

Why ..... has Cruz indicated his intent to run for some elective office in Canada. If not why the interest? Is this a favorite topic of yours?


51 posted on 05/21/2013 10:43:43 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Post #25, for anyone reading this who wants to know Ted Cruz’s position on his own citizenship.


52 posted on 05/21/2013 10:43:44 AM PDT by txrangerette ("...hold to the truth; speak without fear..."(Glenn Beck))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

James Madison 22 May 1789:

I think the merit of the question is now to be decided, whether the gentleman is eligible to a seat in this house or not, but it will depend on the decision of a previous question, whether he has been seven years a citizen of the United-States or not....

It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.


53 posted on 05/21/2013 10:45:11 AM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Lee, and Sen Rand Paul are my adoptive Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: deport

It is of interest only because Mr. Cruz is touted as a possible candidate for President.


54 posted on 05/21/2013 10:46:56 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

LOL!


55 posted on 05/21/2013 10:47:15 AM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Lee, and Sen Rand Paul are my adoptive Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

touted as a possible candidate for President.

************

An until that tout becomes reality it means nothing but fodder for argument.


56 posted on 05/21/2013 10:48:48 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: stormer

El wrongo. The constitution mention aliens, natural born citizens, and citizens. The terms were not defined and were left to congress to define through legislation.
If you are a citizen, and you didn’t have to get naturalized, you are NBC.

In zeal to catch Obama, many try to imply a 4th type of citizenship. You are a citizen, but never had to be naturalized, but you are not natural born.

So we get treated to bizzare opinions as to how the mother must be 18, or rabbit trails through Canadian law, etc.
Cruz is NBC.
Besides, that bridge has already been crossed. Now he doesn’t even have to show a birth certificate to serve.
He cannot be require to pass any test for office that obama did not.


57 posted on 05/21/2013 10:49:05 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

So the citizenship of the father has not bearing? How very modren and liberal of you.


58 posted on 05/21/2013 10:50:47 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Wrong question.

The correct questions is: Do Canadian laws in any way effect or affect US citizenship? The answer is no.


59 posted on 05/21/2013 10:51:55 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino; Ray76

I think people should look at this way. If a female Airman who is married to a Canadian businessman gives birth while serving in the USAF in England, the child would nbC.


60 posted on 05/21/2013 10:52:54 AM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Lee, and Sen Rand Paul are my adoptive Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

“Mr. Cruz was not naturally born in the U.S.”

He is a Senator, so he is clearly a citizen. He gained that citizenship by birth, and never needed to be naturalized. So yes, he is indeed NBC.


61 posted on 05/21/2013 10:53:28 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: deport

I came upon the Canadian citizenship statute while researching statutes of the UK & Commonwealth. It appears to apply to Cruz so I posted it.

Judging by reactions it is a touchy subject.


62 posted on 05/21/2013 10:54:17 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

And why wouldn’t foreign law apply to the US born children of foreigners?

Where is the reciprocity?

At the very least there is a conflict of law.


63 posted on 05/21/2013 10:55:53 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

There is no difference in law between a Citizen of the United States At Birth and a Natural Born Citizen.
Under the law in effect when Ted Cruz was born, he is a Citizen of the United States At Birth.

Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by a Child Born Abroad
Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock

“A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child’s birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen, is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.) The U.S. citizen parent must be genetically related to the child to transmit U.S. citizenship.”

According to Justice Antonin Scalia with Justice Clarence Thomas concurring in Scalia’s opinion in Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420 (1998),
“The 14th Amendment contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization.” That’s a quote from US v. Wong Kim Ark.
If you don’t have Scalia and Thomas, you can’t win with a Vattel/Minor theory at the Supreme Court.


64 posted on 05/21/2013 11:01:57 AM PDT by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

No it is not. It never has been re Lynch v. Clarke.


65 posted on 05/21/2013 11:03:45 AM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Lee, and Sen Rand Paul are my adoptive Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

It does, when he’s in Canada.

When he’s in America, we apply American law.

To carry this to an absurdity, let us assume Chad passes a law that the children born to American diplomats while they are serving in Chad are Chadian citizens and are NOT American citizens.

Our response would be, as it should be, “That’s all fine and dandy, Chad. You pass whatever laws you like and apply them as you see fit. But we don’t base our decisions about American citizenship on the laws of a foreign country.”

The USA has always just ignored the issue of dual (or more) citizenship. If I become legally a citizen of Chad while retaining my American citizenship, I may acquire new obligations to Chad, but my rights and duties as an American citizen change not at all.

Unless of course I renounce my American citizenship, but again that is determined by OUR laws, not those of a foreign power.

Extra credit to anybody who gets the obscure SF reference to Chadian citizenship.


66 posted on 05/21/2013 11:04:13 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Thank you. I get so tired of people claiming that the laws of any another nation decide the citizenship status of an American.

But what would you do if he had remained in Canada and got drafted into their army? A country's own laws apply in their own country. If a man cannot be claimed under another nation's laws, he cannot be made to serve in that nation's army.

67 posted on 05/21/2013 11:04:24 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino
He gained that citizenship by birth, and never needed to be naturalized. So yes, he is indeed NBC.

So are all the plop and drop babies. Are they NBC's too???

68 posted on 05/21/2013 11:05:24 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Well put.


69 posted on 05/21/2013 11:07:39 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

The 14th Amendment provides citizenship by birth in the US to legally residing, but non citizen parents. (jus soli) Sorry pal, but the 14th amendment did not change the legal understanding of Natural Born Citizenship. It only recognizes another way to become a born citizen (no need to naturalize) other than being a Natural Born Citizen (born in country to citizen parents)

It should be noted that the vast majority of citizens of any country consists of people born in that country to Parents that are it’s citizens. These children are the Natural Born Citizens. (see Minor) The court recognized that there may be the possibly other kinds of, or ways to become a born citizen, but that being Natural Born, born in country to citizen parents, carried no doubt of citizenship.

As far as Article II eligibility requirements for holding the office of President, requiring that a candidate be born in the country to citizen parents (NBC) is no great burden/onus, nor is it in any way unreasonable. It still leaves the vast majority of American citizens eligible.

In fact the requirement of Natural Born Citizenship makes the most sense in outlining the bare minimum eligibility requirements which Article II does.

Your interpretation of the 14th amendment is flawed. In USSC WKA, the first application of the 14th Amendment outside of the children of former slaves, the plaintiff was declared a born citizen with no need to naturalize. What you are misinterpreting is the court’s attempt to prevent the establishment of classes of citizenship in that ruling attributable to the manner in which that citizenship was obtained, when they stated that WKAs rights were AS IF he was a Natural Born Citizen.....note that they were careful NOT say he WAS a Natural Born Citizen, only that the rights of all manner of citizens are equal, hereby avoiding the idea of classes of citizenship. You can try and thake that ball across the goal line, but you’re running in the wrong direction.

Further note that being a natural born citizen carries no cachet other than making one eligible to hold the office of the President.

Ignoring Article II of the Constitution despite it’s clear intent has lead us to the disastrous consequences of the Obama Presidency. To support the continued ignoring of that requirement (NBC) in it’s original meaning, is sheer folly. I am surprised that any self proclaimed Conservative could do so.

BTW its NOT OK when our guys do it.....any more than it was when the Treasonous Democrats did with Obama....


70 posted on 05/21/2013 11:09:11 AM PDT by Forty-Niner ( the barely bare, berry bear formally known as Ursus Arctos Horibilis...Hear me roar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Nero Germanicus

The US citizenship of Mr. Cruz is due to collective naturalization by naturalization statute.


71 posted on 05/21/2013 11:09:41 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Mrs. Obama was not old enough to transfer her citizenship to her son and the father was a Kenyan.

A couple of corrections Here.
1. The Mother's age only applies for Foreign birth; a fact, in the case of Obama, not in evidence.

Did I miss your thread about that? John McCain was born in Panama, not the Canal Zone as many think and etc, etc...

2. John McCain was not born in Colon Panama, he was born at the Coco Solo Naval Hospital in the Canal Zone. That "Colon" birth certificate floating around on the internet is a Obot fabrication intended to call into question McCain's legitimacy. It has outlived it's usefulness and has continued fooling people to this day. John McCain has never released his actual birth certificate.

This link does a good job of debunking this false claim, and it is one of two articles which the Washington Post has written on the subject.

And for what it's worth, I don't like John McCain and wish he had been defeated in his last Senate run.

72 posted on 05/21/2013 11:11:15 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

“Judging by reactions it is a touchy subject.”

No, the touchiness not the topic, it’s aimed squarely at trolls who eagerly work to stop the advance of the man who is leading the conservative fight FAR more than any other.


73 posted on 05/21/2013 11:11:18 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
The meaning of the term-of-art ‘natural born citizen’ has been addressed, and confirmed by the US Supreme Court. The idea that all persons who are a citizen at birth, are ‘natural born citizens’ can not possibly be accepted for the simple reason that NO part of the Constitution can be interpreted in such a way as to make any part of the Constitution irrelevant. This principle is Verba intelligi ut aliquid operantur debent, which means 'words must be understood to have some effect. What that means is that the Constitution MUST be interpreted in such a way that every word in relevant. The idea that ‘citizen at birth’ equates to ‘natural born citizen’ ignores the word ‘natural’. If the intention was otherwise, they would have simply said a ‘born citizen’, or a ‘citizen at birth’ or ‘born a citizen’. So it is clear they intended something else. So - what does the word ‘natural’ mean in the context of ‘natural born citizen’?

There are two types of law. There is ‘positive law’ - this is man-made law, such as the Constitution, laws from Congress, state law, local ordinances, and so on. And then there is ‘natural law’ - this is the law of nature, or the divine. An example of 'natural law' would be when the founders wrote the Declaration of Independence, and stated :

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. When they are talking about 'unalienable rights', they are talking about 'natural law'.

So, the term ‘natural born citizen’ means EXACTLY what it says, a citizen at birth according to natural law.

OK - what is a citizen by natural law? Remember, a natural law is one that is unwritten. So a citizen by natural law, would be a citizen that would require no man made ‘positive’ law to be a citizen. So, when is someone a citizen without need of any positive law? When they can be nothing else. Does that sound familiar? Ever heard someone answer a question with the word ‘naturally’, because the answer could be nothing else? “Does Monday come after Sunday? Naturally!” Who can be nothing other than a citizen at birth, and therefore requires no positive law?

There are 4 basic variables governing citizenship. Born in or out of a country. Both parents are citizens. One parent is a citizen. Neither parent is a citizen.
The first (where born) is combined with the other 3 to determine whether or not a child is a citizen at birth. There are laws written to govern every situation - except one. The only situation not covered by positive law is when a child is born in a country, and both parents are citizens of that country. Why? Because no law is required, the child is a citizen ‘naturally’. Both sides want to ignore this FACT.

There is a legal term Jura naturæ sunt immutabilia - and it means, "The laws of nature are unchangeable".

The Congress CAN NOT declare a person a 'Natural Born Citizen', because they CAN NOT change the definition, it's immutable.

The idea that Ted Cruz meets the NBC clause is ridiculous, Ted Cruz is a US citizen NOT by natural law, but by statutory law, as written in the Immigration and Nationality Act (either section 301, or section 320).

Just look at the titles of the chapters those sections are in! The title of the chapter section 301 is in - CHAPTER 1 -- NATIONALITY AT BIRTH AND BY COLLECTIVE NATURALIZATION. We know that Cruz was not considered a 'US National', he is a Citizen, so his citizenship would be from "COLLECTIVE NATURALIZATION". The title of the chapter containing section 320? CHAPTER 2 -- NATIONALITY THROUGH NATURALIZATION, that says it all, all persons who are 'citizens by birth' through these sections, are citizens "THROUGH NATURALIZATION". Also, notice these are not 'Citizens at birth', they are 'Citizens BY birth'. There is a BIG difference, persons who automatically acquire Citizenship via section 320, are not actually a US citizen until they move to the US and establish permanent residence. Until that time they are 'nationals', who qualify 'by birth' to automatically become Citizens when they permanently move to the US.

That is why it was always clear that you must be born on US soil to be president, because ALL US citizens, born outside the US, even if a citizen bt/at birth, they are 'naturalized US citizens', and NOT 'natural born Citizens'.

Maybe where a person is born shouldn’t really matter. I’ve seen many immigrants who are much more patriotic than natural born American’s. But there is a process to go thru if that is the case, and that process is the Amendment process. But that probably wouldn’t go through. So what do they do? They simply ignore that part of the Constitution. The real danger is what part do they decide to ignore next?
74 posted on 05/21/2013 11:11:32 AM PDT by MMaschin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Like I said, Canada applies its own laws in its own ways.

Now if Canada attempted to force him into its army, he might be able to claim exemption on the basis that he was also an American citizen. But whether that would be accepted or not depends on Canadian law, not American law.


75 posted on 05/21/2013 11:12:17 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Rubio parents were legal residents of the US at the time Rubio was born thus making him a nbC in accordance with Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.

That is a contradiction in terms. You can't be a "natural" citizen if they have to make a special law for you. It is the very opposite of "natural."

76 posted on 05/21/2013 11:12:30 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

I have been trying for a long time, but I usually never get any response from a moderator.


77 posted on 05/21/2013 11:13:47 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

From a prior post:

Has Regulation Put An End To Rule Of Law?

Monday, December 27, 2010 11:37:43 PM · 19 of 25
infool7 to Kaslin

Thanks for the Post Kaslin. The way I see it.

The final debauching of America required a test of one of its most fundamental principles. America has proven that on the whole, it no longer comprehends or values any of its initial charter. The constitution is defacto null and void. The elected government and its media enablers are a criminal enterprise. The laws passed in the last several years are but ambiguous vehicles for selective enforcement in support of its crony capitalism or fodder for Madoff style investment scams. November’s election was a good start and America is still in a precariously weakened state however time is running out for them and they are getting desperate. We need to get our buckets ready and prepare to put out the next Reichstag fire.

“Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves. “ Winston Churchill


78 posted on 05/21/2013 11:14:44 AM PDT by infool7 (The ugly truth is just a big lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Then why do male resident aliens have to register for Selective Service at 18 years of age in the US?

WHO MUST REGISTER

Almost all male U.S. citizens, and male immigrants living in the U.S., who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. It’s important to know that even though he is registered, a man will not automatically be inducted into the military. In a crisis requiring a draft, men would be called in sequence determined by random lottery number and year of birth. Then, they would be examined for mental, physical and moral fitness by the military before being deferred or exempted from military service or inducted into the Armed Forces.

http://www.sss.gov/FSwho.htm


79 posted on 05/21/2013 11:15:22 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Sarah Palin's next run. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Since we have a Kenyan born president we should push this Cruz guy to run for president as a diversion as watch the press get their panties in a wad over it. Then we can remind them of how unimportant it was when the birth of their guy came into question.


80 posted on 05/21/2013 11:16:53 AM PDT by Cyclone59 (Obama is like Ron Burgundy - he will read ANYTHING that is on the teleprompter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

There is no reciprocity. You may have heard it expressed as “the world isn’t fair”.
Japan puts up incredible trade barriers to American rice imports. We allow their products straight in.
We offer Mexicans free welfare when they come illegally, and allow them to buy houses, etc.
They arrest Americans who try to live there permanently, and it’s very difficult for you to buy property.

I know it’s amazing, but our immigration laws are not synchronized with other nations. Some recognize dual citizenship, others do not, still others will arrest you for treason for being dual.

Welcome to earth.


81 posted on 05/21/2013 11:17:09 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
My point is that it shouldn’t matter any more after a clearly non-NBC was twice elected president, or are there different rules for Republicans and Democrats?

And this part is pretty much true. It's self evident that neither the Courts or any other authority cares what is the accurate and correct meaning of the term. This, however, is an academic discussion, and I (speaking for myself) am not at all interested in subsequent points of law or this or that ruling. I am interested in determining what is the Actual truth, which I count as a very different thing than merely the Uneducated Opinion of the courts or the legislature.

The Courts will merely insist on giving us the "Wong" answer.

82 posted on 05/21/2013 11:17:35 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Your argument has no bearing of the ultimate outcome; Rubio is nbC.


83 posted on 05/21/2013 11:18:02 AM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Lee, and Sen Rand Paul are my adoptive Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

You misunderstand.

I like Cruz. He has an admirable record of accomplishment. He is intelligent and principled, and can articulate those principles. He defends the right of the unborn to their life, he supports border control and immigration enforcement, he supports Austrian economics. None of that has any bearing on Article II eligibility.


84 posted on 05/21/2013 11:18:58 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Who cares. Rubio is Jus Soli.

So were Slaves and Indians, but they didn't get citizenship until congress passed special laws for them. Again, you can't have "natural" citizenship if someone has to pass a law to give it to you.

85 posted on 05/21/2013 11:19:22 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Not so, I am correct.

Only in the minds of people who do not know better.

86 posted on 05/21/2013 11:20:07 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
The laws of Canada are of no concern for determining the citizenship of the United States. Only US laws apply.

I don't think it's impacting Cruz's U.S. citizenship but raising the possibility of dual citizenship. Many people argue that Obama is ineligible on those grounds alone.

87 posted on 05/21/2013 11:21:57 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ray76
So the citizenship of the father has not bearing? How very modren and liberal of you.

*****

FYI: My son was born in England, and has a British father. I took him to the US Embassy in London when he was a month old to get him registered as a US Citizen. I was given a

Certificate of Birth Abroad
of a Citizen of the United States of America
and a US passport with his name and photo on it.

The words "natural born" do not occur on any of the explanatory information that I was also given about his situation. My understanding has been that he could not run for POTUS, just as my husband could not play rugby for Wales. But that is not explicitly written anywhere on the official info given to me that day.

88 posted on 05/21/2013 11:22:52 AM PDT by maica (Welcome to post-rational America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

And Cruz is exactly right, there only two kinds of citizens...born and Naturalized.

A Natural Born Citizen IS a born citizen,

Cruz can claim born citizenship due to his birth to a citizen mother. He cannot lay claim to Natural Born Citizenship due to his foreign place of birth and his foreign citizen father.

Natural Born citizenship is a quality of born citizenship. One that is required for Holding the office of the President. Cruz does not qualify.....no worries, there are millions and millions more that do.


89 posted on 05/21/2013 11:22:53 AM PDT by Forty-Niner ( the barely bare, berry bear formally known as Ursus Arctos Horibilis...Hear me roar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Rubio meets and passes the test regardless.

His parents were not

1. Foreign heads of States or Diplomats
2. Illegal Foreign occupiers or at war with the US
3. Born on a reservation
4. Committed acts of treasons


90 posted on 05/21/2013 11:23:44 AM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Lee, and Sen Rand Paul are my adoptive Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Cyclone59

That’s just what Hillary Clinton is counting on.


91 posted on 05/21/2013 11:25:03 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
According to “Mr Cruz” himself (his Senate staff spokesman), there are only two types of United States citizens. One, when born, is a citizen.

What if Congress passes a law which naturalizes anyone born to a mother with green eyes? Does this make their children "natural born citizens"?

(And please do not come back with "congress would never pass such a law." That is beside the point. Congress HAS the power to pass such a law. The point is whether or not Congress can make "natural born citizen" mean whatever it wants to. )

92 posted on 05/21/2013 11:25:43 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Each sovereign nation is exactly that ... sovereign. No reciprocity except by agreement between the two parties.


93 posted on 05/21/2013 11:26:24 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Yes, until legislation excludes them, the anchor babies are unfortunately eligible. I don’t like it a bit. But they are under the jurisdiction of the USA, and are born here. And this is reason number 681 that we need border enforcement.


94 posted on 05/21/2013 11:27:12 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Were you this concerned with Obama’s citizenship?


95 posted on 05/21/2013 11:28:25 AM PDT by ForAmerica (Texas Conservative Christian Black Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
I was talking about Rubio, but since Cruz’s mother was a US Citizens who owed her alleges to the US, this would make Ted Cruz a US citizens (Natural Born) at birth.

Had Congress not passed the citizenship act of 1934, Cruz would have no claim on American citizenship.

It is ridiculous to believe that a term which was codified in 1787 could be modified by a law passed in 1934.

96 posted on 05/21/2013 11:28:34 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
uh no, he is not an anchor baby. His parents were in the US LEGALLY therefore in accordance with the US Constitution, he is nbC whether or not you like it.

The 14th amendment just makes him a "citizen", not a "natural born citizen." The 14th amendment didn't even work on Indians until congress passed the "Indian citizenship act of 1924." Obviously there are some serious holes in your theory.

97 posted on 05/21/2013 11:30:41 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

Article II specifies “citizen” at the time of adoption of the constitution, and “natural born citizen” thereafter.

“Citizen” necessarily encompasses “naturalized citizen” as well as “natural born citizen”. If a naturalization statute creates “natural born citizens” then there is no need for Art. II’s grandfather clause, “citizen” would have sufficed.

Cruz is a US citizen by US naturalization statute.


98 posted on 05/21/2013 11:30:57 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: ForAmerica

Yes. Since September 2008.


99 posted on 05/21/2013 11:32:13 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Cruz is not a US natural born citizen.


100 posted on 05/21/2013 11:33:59 AM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-369 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson