natural born Citizens: Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Ted Cruz

Legal Insurrection ^ | 9/3/13 | William Jacobson

[Lakeshark]

Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution provides, in pertinent part:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

**snip**

This political season, the eligibilities of Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal and Ted Cruz are the subject of debate.

As much as we want certainty, the term “natural born Citizen” is not defined in the Constitution, in the writings or history of those who framed the Constitution, or in a demonstrable common and clear understanding in the former British colonies at the time the Constitution was drafted. Nor has the Supreme Court ever ruled on the issue, it probably never will.

The modifier “natural born” is not used anywhere else in the Constitution, and its precise origins are unclear, although it is assumed to be derived in some manner from the British common and statutory law governing “natural born Subjects.” **snip**

want to go on record again objecting to the term “birther.” If the term were confined to conspiracy theorists, that would be one thing. But it has become a tool to shut down even legitimate debate.

The term was used as a pejorative as part of a deliberate Obama campaign strategy to shut down debate on his issues **snip**

5. The Framers never expressed what “natural born Citizen” meant **snip**
6. “natural born Citizen” usage at the time of drafting the Constitution is uncertain **snip**
7. British common and statutory law doesn’t solve the problem **snip**
8. There Is No Requirement That Both Parents Be Citizens

[sourcery]

Do you think anyone is going to read that wall of repeated crap after Jim zotted a birther yesterday?

There it is: The concession of defeat by means of ad-hominem attack, and by refusal to argue or even consider the case presented.

[nesnah]

OUTSTANDING POST!

[DoodleDawg]

So what should I call the useful idiots who insist that Ted Cruz can't be President?

You can cut "useful idiots" in half?

[Cold Case Posse Supporter]

Great post. It explains in precise detail why Cruz is not eligible along with Jindal and Rubio. Constitutional attorney Herb Titus would agree that Cruz, Jindal and Rubio are statutory citizens. A statutory citizen (bestowed by man’s pen) can never be a “natural born” citizen (bestowed by God/nature). 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”.

[JRandomFreeper]

Just another cut-and-paste birther moron doing what they do. I expect their ranks are going to get thinned in the near future.

/johnny

[publana]

Zotted before I could track him down to do so. LOL

Thank you Mod.

[JRandomFreeper]

You didn't present a case, you cut and pasted a wall of text.

The case has been considered, and Jim made it clear that there won't be any crap of attacking Cruz over the birther issue.

/johnny

[sourcery]

Spamming before you even read it. Shame on you.

But I have read it. I follow the Legal Insurrection blog.

I posted my essay because it comprehensively refutes Jacobson's thesis.

[NonValueAdded]

I did. I'm looking for the decisions to back my comment and this line from the article:

Since we must construe the Constitution (or any law for that matter) so as to give meaning to all terms when possible and reasonable, we have to assume that “natural born” means something, and was not just an error or excess verbiage.

So who peed in your cornflakes this morning?

[sourcery]

Incorrect, but lots of words are cool.

By my words comprehensively prove my thesis. Your words...not so much.

[MeganC]

So what should I call the useful idiots who insist that Ted Cruz can't be President?

Maybe Cruz can be President but I won't be voting for him because having another citizen of a Commonwealth nation in the White House (Obama was born a Commonwealth citizen courtesy of his father's Commonwealth citizenship) is not something I want to entertain. Let him stay in the Senate where he can do some good and let's have a 100% American conservative in the White House for 2016.

[JRandomFreeper]

Your opinion is meaningless at the national level.

/johnny

[P-Marlowe]

The burden should be on those challenging otherwise eligible candidates to demonstrate through clear and convincing historical evidence and legal argument why such persons should be disqualified. That has not happened so far, and if two hundred years of scholarship is any indication, it never will happen. The ultimate arbiter on the issue likely is to be voters, not Supreme Court Justices.

Brilliant minds think alike. :-)

I have made this same point over and over since the discussions began here on Free Republic.

The burden of proof of ineligibility lies on those asserting it. The evidence must be clear and convincing and if the case were even given a hearing in court, then all reasonable doubt would be given to Ted Cruz.

Hence, there is not a snowball's chance in Hell that any court will determine that he is not a Natural Born Citizen, or as Mr. Jacobson noted "natural born Citizen" with the capitals only on the term Citizen.

So those who want to insist that Ted Cruz is not a Natural Born Citizen will have to be their own judge and jury on the subject.

If denying Ted Cruz his rightful inheritance as a natural born Citizen is more important than saving the country from Tryanny, then vote for someone else. Vote For the GOP-E candidate. Vote for Hillary. But don't use Free Republic as your forum to infect the unwary with your insane notions that Ted Cruz is not a NBC. He is. Get over it!

Everyone.... Read this article!

[sourcery]

Your opinion is meaningless at the national level.

Your statement is an emotion-based rejection of an argument. It presents not facts, no logic, and fails to address the issue on its merits. As such, it is meaningless on each and every level.

[Impy]

So when it’s Cruz V. Hillary, you are gonna waste your vote for some third party? Super lame.

[publana]

One can hope. Crazy does not belong on FR.

[Impy]

They are “useful” to the democrats (and RINOs running for the Republican nomination like Christie and Jeb).

[JRandomFreeper]

Nope. My statement is factual. What you posted is opinion and conjecture. And at the national level it is meaningless. Even on FR, it looks like the admins yanked your meaningless screed.

/johnny

[sourcery]

If denying Ted Cruz his rightful inheritance as a natural born Citizen is more important than saving the country from Tryanny, then vote for someone else.

You would destroy the village in order to save it? One cannot 'save the country from tyranny' by violating the Constitution whose strict observance is the only mechanism that prevents tyranny. That's a logical contradiction, and logical contradictions are absolute falsifications.

[trisham]

Thank you, PM.