If you want the Cliff notes version, the basic problem is the Founders nor Congress have defined “Natural Born Citizen”. The courts so far have precedent dealing with mainly citizenship problems not qualification for office. This is new territory for them.
In common law there are two definitions for natural born. The first is merely a citizen from birth. The second, more restrictive, is both parents must be citizens and optionally the person in question must be born in the country and/or resided in country for a specified length of time. The courts, to date, have not required the latter as there is no spelled out definition in any USA law.
Ted Cruz does not have the problem of an underage mother at birth like Obama does. Obama also has the other problem of likely being adopted in Indonesia, which does not recognize dual citizenship like Canada does.
I have no problem requiring the more stringent definition, but it is going to require an act of Congress or a Constitutional Amendment to place it in law.
As I said before, Cruz has already won three court challenges on eligibility. Everybody needs drop that one, that dog doesn’t hunt…
That is exactly why that dog DOES hunt. The correlation between Vattel’s Law of Nations and Natural Born Citizen could not be more clear. Those who refute the wording and prefer to read it as pertains to British Common Law ignore the FACTS of Vattel’s standing with the Framers, the Founders, and the International Law at the time of the Constitutions birth.
It has only been with the intrusion of socialism ...marxism into our country that any consideration has been given to those who are clearly NOT natural born citizens. Our Marxist Educational system has sorely neglected Civics and True, Unrevised American history.
A spelled out definition was not necessary at the time of the framing because the Framers ALL KNEW what natural born citizen meant: A person born of two citizen parents on the native soil. PROGRESSIVES are Attempting now to merge the meaning of Citizen with Natural Born Citizen when they are TWO DIFFERENT things.
It is becoming quite clear that the Founders and Framers were extremely wise to guard against a president with divided loyalties. Cruz is not a defender of America’s SOVEREIGNTY. His votes prove it.
GNTY