IMHO the 1790 statue is very clear on the subject. It says citizens as in mother and father. It does not say citizen. I like how the Cruz people are all for the Constitution as all of us on here on FR are but when it comes to the 1790 statue the knees start to give.
The stupid, it hurts.
The only reason Cruz is lying about being "natrualized authomatically by operation of statute" is that he wants to be president.
Mr. Bellei, who lost his US citizenship, actually argued that he was born in the US. His BC from Italy contradicted him.
Ted Cruz was born in Canada....
LIVE BY THE LAWS AMERICA WAS FOUNDED UPON
GO. TRUMP. GO!!!
“You don’t ask permission to do something that’s legal or unchallenged. Cruz is absolutely right to say he won’t be taking legal advice from Donald Trump.”
Id bring this up at every stump speech form here on out until the DONNY just gives up and tweets himself into a LATHER
GO TED ....GO MARK LEVIN....
FORWARD TO IOWA...
“If the high court defined “Natural Born Citizen” to mean something besides “anything other than a naturalized citizen” (which is the only definition in use now), it would create a new category of citizenship. A second-class citizen who is technically not naturalized, but not eligible for the benefits of being “natural born,” that one benefit being the presidency.”
That is the oft repeated lie used to justify an invalid strawman argument. The fact is that there has been a naturalized citizenship at birth status in Anglo-American jurisprudence ever since the passage of the Naturalization Act of 1541 by the English Parliament. The English and British governments have traditionally maintained limitations upon the right of a person born with alien parents to service in the Privy Council and other public offices in England and Britain. The authors of the Constitution decided to open up those traditional restrictions to every public office except the Office of the President and the Office of the Vice President. This limitation of rights for naturalization citizenship at birth has always been a part of U.S. citizenship law, so it is not a new category of citizenship and it is nothing new. The author’s argument is a strawman argument, and it is a fraud being used to deceive the readers.
Precedent Obama has rendered that clause moot.
Under the current definition of simply being born a citizen, if even only on one’s mother’s side, makes every anchor baby and Winston Churchill eligible. (his mother was an American)
I went to school in the 1960’s and was taught that natural born citizen was a subset of citizen and required only for the office of President. Must be born here to citizen parents. Reading the writings of the people who wrote the Constitution confirms this. They wanted no divided allegiance. If you could be anything other than a U.S. citizen, you can’t be a natural born citizen. No foreign births, no foreign parents.
Many people wanted the definition changed for various reasons. The Republicans had many more ineligible people coming up than the Democrats so they gave Obama a pass.
Having an usurper in office has not been good for the country, has it?
If you watched the debate, Trump clearly stated that Cruz did not have to listen to him, the information came from noted Constitutional Scholars. The issue of lines of succession if something happened to POTUS or VPOTUS on down the line, was covered under the Law Of Nations. Clearly stated, to have Natural Born Status, your parents must be BORN in the US, and You must be born in the US. Unless your an immigrant and less than 2 generations in the US, your Natural Born, The purpose is to have NO ALLEGIANCE to any country OUTSIDE of the US. The only exception was when the US was originally formed, and 2 generations after. As it was impossible to attain NATURAL BORN status, until the 3rd Generation after the US was established. The rights of succession if the Pres or VP were to fall, was to maintain temporary control over the government until new elections could reasonably be held, not to be a permanent solution. IMO, the people writing and preaching against NBC, either do not want to understand the why of it, and rather want to change the Constitution for their own ends. I do hope that we clarify the intent of the definition and understand the reason why the framers did this. It makes perfect sense to me. I will add that John McCain went to congress, and they affirmed that he could run. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/sres511/text
This, I think is what Trump was referring to for Cruz.
Obama has no less than 27 lawsuits, some before he took office, questioning his qualification as a Natural Born Citizen. We know that he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, that his real name is Barry Soetoro, and he never changed his name legally to Barak Obama, is an Indonesian Citizen, and never took US Citizenship from a US Embassy after his 18th birthday, and his mother did not satisfy the requirements of living in the US to confer citizenship to him. Yet, the Supreme Court consistently refused to hear any of the cases. I think they will now have to hear this case. At least, I hope so.
No, No, NO!
“Natural Born Citizen” means that those born of Caesarian section cannot be president! ;-) /s
Who is authorized to define “Natural Born Citizen” other than the Supreme Court?
Excellent point.
No one is going to rule that Ted Cruz, being a citizen by nature of his birth, is not a natural born citizen.
This is a big red herring that too many freepers are chasing.
If you think Trump is the Savior of the Republic, then try to convince us by reference to his record and his positions over the years and his words and deeds.
If you have to resort to birther arguments to convince us that Trump is your political Messiah, then you have no ammunition.
Objections to placing the names of Obama, Cruz and Rubio on the ballot have been dismissed both on the merits and for lack of standing. Donald Trump, having standing, could file an objection, and the matter would have to be decided (yet again) on the merits.
Iowa Election LawI assume challenges based on constitutional qualification have been lodged in writing, but this is a different vector. Certainly there is probable cause to believe a certification of qualification is false. By operation of US law, as currently expressed in SCOTUS precedent, Cruz is naturalized. This action doesn't remove Cruz from the ballot (probably too late for that), but it does require a finding so hr serious misdemeanor charge can be disposed of.39A.4 Election misconduct in the third degree.
1. A person commits the crime of election misconduct in the third degree if the person willfully commits any of the following acts: ...
c. Miscellaneous offenses.
(3) Making a false answer under chapter 43 relative to a person's qualifications and party affiliations.
One more thing to remember. The GOPe was scared to death to go after Obama on anything. Remember when McQueeg was mad because people said “Hussien”. I can assure you the dimoKKKRATS will have no hesitation going after Cruz if he is the nominee. Cruz needs to settle this thing soon. The sooner the better.
If you guys recall, all of the past Obama birther suits were thrown out because of a technicality - ‘Plaintiff has no standing’.
The NBC issues were fought by Obama’s lawyers who would point to the clause in the Constitution that says that the Electoral College determines if the winner is an NBC.
Its a ‘Catch 22’ situation. The decision is made after the election where the winner of the election is allowed to stuff the Electoral College with his supporters.
Its a flaw in the Constitution that has never been addressed.
As a result, we ended up with Obama.
What they really should do is have the previous Electoral College reconvene before the election.
The Constitution is clear. Natural Born only refers to President and VP. The reason the VP. must be Natural Born is in the event something should happen to the President the VP. would be sworn in as President. If something happened to the VP. after becoming President then the Speaker of the House would step in temporally special election would take place.