Skip to comments.Cruz says he is a US citizen 'by birth' despite being born in Canada
Posted on 10/29/2013 9:02:51 AM PDT by txrangerette
click here to read article
There are going to be RINOs passing themselves off as constitutional conservatives who work very hard at keeping conservatives out of power. They’re probably the same ones who aren’t talking about needing to cut into the hispanic vote, like they were just a few months ago.
That is how it has always worked. Same for the dictator, same for McLame. I have friends from the military who were born in France and the other in Belgium. Both sets of parents were citizens, on foreign soil by way of military orders. It really makes no difference. If you mother goes into labor while visiting in a foreign country it does not automatically make you foreign born. Foreign born has always meant not born in this country and not born to citizen parents. That is why the use of the 14th amendment to validate anchor babies is unconstitutional.
“Whenever I can” is rather limiting for me, DoodleDawg.
I can’t do this but for a very limited time each day.
But I get your point.
He's a big Rand Paul pimp.
And I use that word pimp in the non-perjorative sense.
Rand Paul might make a good vice president if he could get back on principle rather than pragmatist politics. Why would he support rino Mitch McConnell? Regardless of how he moves forward I'm not sure he needs a pimp. (I meant that in the pejorative way of course)
Of course he is a citizen by birth. The legal question is whether that is the same thing as “natural born citizen”. It’s a legal question we ALL deserve to get an answer to. It would not be fair to Ted Cruz to run and win the Presidency and then have a SCOTUS with Obama appointees rule that he is not eligible. Every candidate and every voter deserves to have a set-in-stone, legally locked-down answer to the question BEFORE running or voting.
That’s all I’m saying, and it’s all I’ve ever said about that. It’s what I said at a committee hearing at the Nebraska legislature. We all deserve answers, and the judicial system is ROBBING us of that right, by deflecting the cases with the excuse that it’s nobody’s business.
Everybody has their opinion of what is meant by the term, but what we ALL need is a SCOTUS decision. BEFORE we spend our energy, money, and votes. That is not too much to ask, and the courts have abdicated their responsibility by refusing to give us that answer.
Let people talk. That's the only path to understanding.
The more you and others try to shut down discussion, the less people are going to arrive at the same conclusions you have.
For my part, I believe that Ted Cruz is exactly the sort of citizen the Framers had in mind when they crafted the restrictive eligibility requirements for the office of President. I believe he's cut from as good a stock as any of them were, and is eminently qualified to be our CIC.
But --- it took listening to, and reading the well crafted arguments of others on this board for me to logically work my way to that eureka conclusion.
Don't stop now. You're helping others to get to that same place, but you've got to be willing to let them talk too.
U.S. vs. Wong Kim Ark is also not a good example to hold here as it was about two foreign immigrants with a child born in the US.
“A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution,
All person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
You guys trying to impugn Cruz by repeating these legal citations without actually reading the cases are looking dumber every time you post that crap.
So our Founders would have welcomed with open arms the son of the King of England as President as long as the mother was a U.S. citizen?
What value is there in having one citizen parent rather than none? What would be the point?
If the reason for the NBC requirement is to eliminate a chief cause of questionable loyalty, how is that accomplished if one parent is a citizen of a foreign country?
That is your personal opinion.
It is not found in the Constitution or in any federal law.
Would your opinion of the suitability of Cruz change if he were only 32 years old?
Would your opinion change if NEITHER of Cruz's parents were U.S. citizens?
If the Constitutional requirement read, "must be born to two U.S. citizens", would that diminish your estimate of Cruz's suitability?
What do you think it should be? I'm of the opinion that the Constitution should have the meaning that our Founders intended. If settled law disagrees with that, then settled law is wrong and should be changed.
He looks like Phil Helmuth in that picture.
“Has there been a showing that this is the case for Cruz?”
No proof needed as he holds a US birth certificate that is all the roof needed. That certificate is issued under law and he has one. You would need to sue, show proof otherwise, and have standing. Good luck getting standing.
As of this second, Cruz has the only document needed to prove his natural born status and that is a birth certificate issued by the US government.
Yes. Cruz's mother was born, raised, and educated in the U.S. through the university level.
British law don’t mean crap. The Constitution recognized three kinda of status. Alien, citizen, and natural born citizen. If you are weren’t naturalized to get citizenship, then you’re natural born.
We didn’t adopt British law wholesale, that’s a fraud to claim we did.
What strikes me in Cruz’s statement about eligibility is that he claims such on only his mother’s citizenship. This is like saying a father has no bearing as to birth status. I don’t believe a father can be taken out of the birth status. Obama has cleverly played the system in this regard as to his eligibility. I believe the Founders as men of the world were aware of possible situations involving parentage and they intended a requirement as to both parents being eligible citizens, not a take your choice of which parent best fits your desires. That is why in cases cited it is parentS not either or.
Lets all go beat a dead horse.
You say beat a dead horse, they say give it cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Great. So long has he denounces his Canadian citizenship, then, sounds like he’s good to go.
Like Many of those who fought Batista he did not know what the end result would be.
Just as many who voted for Obama did not know their insurance would be canceled and their premiums raised.
We tried to tell them, but they wouldn’t listen.
I believe Ted Cruz is a good man, at least better than anything else I have seen.
First, Sen. Cruz is my Senator. I voted for him in the primary and I repeated that vote in the general election. So, claiming that I am trying to impugn him is false at its core.
One of the things about America that makes it exceptional is that it was founded on the rule of law, NOT the rule of man. zero has changed us into a nation that follows the rule of man by shredding the Constitution. I'm sorry that you don't like the fact that, under our system of laws, Cruz is not eligible to be POTUS. Like you, I wish he were. But, if wishes were nickels, we'd all be rich! Cruz does not qualify under the Natural Born Citizen requirement of the Constitution because he was not born on American soil of two people, both of whom were American citizens at the time of his birth. That's not my opinion, that's what the Constitution requires of presidential candidates.
We all know that zero doesn't qualify under the same clause, but no one has the cajones to challenge him on it. Every court challenge against his eligibility has been dismissed because the plaintiff was found by the court to not have the standing to bring such a case to court. Should Cruz decide to run or even be elected POTUS, you know as well as I that the left will flood the courts with challenges to his eligibility and you know that they will win because the left has loaded up the courts with leftists judges.
Like it or not, my FRiends, that is the rule of law!
If the King of Great Britain had a child by an American woman, he would have been - by definition - a bastard with no claim to the throne, so yes.
Youj probably would find no greater enemy of the British monarchy.
What value is there in having one citizen parent rather than none?
The value of having one citizen parent is that it makes one a natural born citizen. Having no citizen parent makes one's citizenship a matter of geography, and likely requires a full naturalization process.
If the reason for the NBC requirement is to eliminate a chief cause of questionable loyalty, how is that accomplished if one parent is a citizen of a foreign country?
The Federalist seems less concerned with the question of loyalty due to foreign parentage and more concerned about having a standard by which any Congressman, Senator, or President on the national level would be eligible for similar offices at the state level.
UGH. I despise Phil Helmuth.
I'm not interested in answering your hypothetical, ill posed questions. I think Ted Cruz is one of the finest Americans sent to Congress in my lifetime, and I am honored that I had a hand in electing him.
If he runs for the White House in 2016, he's got my vote.
“I’m sorry that you don’t like the fact that, under our system of laws, Cruz is not eligible to be POTUS.”
Throw all the temper tantrums you want but no legal mind agrees with you. Not a single one.
I don’t believe any of you idiots have ever read the materials you keep passing around as you did above, yet, you keep basing your idiotic claims on the content of those posts. Yes, I called you an idiot because you ignorantly believe in something you have never read. That’s an idiot.
“That’s not my opinion, that’s what the Constitution requires of presidential candidates.”
That IS your OPINION. The Constitution says nothing of what you claim it says. You’re so stupid as to not know the difference between opinion and fact.
I appreciate Cruz also. I appreciate the Constitution MORE.
What is "ill posed" about asking whether your estimate of the qualities of a candidate should override the requirement of being 35 years old?
It's a pretty simple question. Either you value the protections afforded by the Constitution to the point that you will support recognizing its prohibitions or you don't.
Works for me! Go Cruz missile!
His mother was born in DE in 1935. She graduated from college in TX in 1956.
Cruz was born in 1970 and his father met his mother in New Orleans after his first marriage broke up some time after 1960.
Only after his parents married did they move to Calgary together.
So if his mother was 14 in 1949 and did not move to Canada until some time after 1960 - which is apparently the case - there is no legal dispute.
Maybe you should read the law more. Here, try reading this:
Actually READ the law instead of spouting what you *THINK* it says. Don't be afraid. It is written in plain English. No fancy Latin, no fancy wording, just plain old English that a 6th grader can read.
I just handed you and everyone reading this post the link to the actual law, yet, we'll still get a bunch of morons claiming things not in law as they will not take the time to read it. People who do that are no better than any liberal claiming crap they know nothing about. In my book, that makes them liberals.
Cruz would otherwise appear to be the correct candidate at a very important moment in our history. Most of us are prepared to accept that his intentions for our country are beyond any reasonable question.
The very real risk is that someday in the future it will be said that there is valid precedence on both sides of the political spectrum that NBC status can be acquired on the basis of one parent being a US citizen, regardless of place of birth.
Think about the possibilities that offers and then also think about how our nation has drifted politically in the past 60 years.
There is nothing stopping Arnold from RUNNING for President. He can’t actually assume the Office but he can run.
Not according to Minor v. Happersett...
Cruz is eligible because Obama was elected. Argument ends there. If I refute the fact that Obama was not elected then I can refute Cruz is ineligible. I can’t refute that Obama was elected.
The electorate has lowerd the Constitutional bar. Simple.
It’s not about whether he is or isn’t so much as that *any time at all* is dedicated to discussing/explaining it. This will be like gum on the sole of a shoe. It’s truly unfortunate. And not fair.
Yeah. Cruz came from Canada. Obama came from Hell. Cruz is much more eligible.
Here’s the actual law:
“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 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 .
cruz’s mommy meets this requirement. Bammys mommy doesn’t........
The Supreme Court Miller decision was "settled law" for about 70 years, with judges declaring that the right to keep and bear arms was a "collective right" of the organized Militia. This settled law was set straight by the Heller decision.
If the Founders had meant to allow a person who has only one citizen parent to be President, they could easily have said that.
Others have posted on this very thread the statute which discussed the circumstances under which a woman could pass on U.S. citizenship to her child. Statutory arrangements regarding citizenship are proof, as far as I am concerned, that the citizenship in question could never have been considered "natural born".
Cruz should run so that if the supreme court rules him ineligble it would nullify every obama decision made as potus......
Fat is we really do not know where Obama was born for sure.
They only lowered the bar for natural born citizen for Democrats. You can expect the bar to be as high as possible when applied to a Tea Party hero.
Isn’t it obvious that the Democrats and GOPe only apply the law when it is to their advantage?
Selective enforcement is how the Democrats maintain their unfair advantage over us law biding folks.
You misread the finding.
The court found that the Constitution does not specify, but that Minor was a natural born citizen under any possible definition because she was born on US soil to US citizen parents.
The case did not attempt to define "natural born" - it only opined that Minor's natural citizenship was unassailable.
Cruz is eligible because Obama was elected.
Incorrect. Cruz is eligible because he is a natural born citizen of the United States.
Yes, it is, and you make my point for me.
On the one hand we have Ted Kennedy killing a woman, and on the other we have, say, my cousin Dan, a brilliant economist who has, say, an unpaid traffic ticket for speeding and going through a red light. Except Dan is conservative.
They will never stop talking about Dan’s recklessness and irresponsibility during his entire campaign. Welcome to the world we live in.
As evidenced by the fact that we got this info about Cruz from Obama guard dog Fx News, as I have mentioned elsewhere, I will support whichever "conservative" candidate that Fx selects as Republican presidential nominee. (I know nomination process isn't supposed to work that way but ...)
Yep with sunglasses he looks like Roy Orbison and without sunglasses he looks alot like Joe McCarthy, which whom I believe he was RIGHT all along.
Now I just need to know since Ted is a good debater is he good with a guitar? =)
Thanks for this!!! Unarguable.
Where were you for the past couple of days when I had a mob at my throat for saying (a very simplified version) of the same thing?
No. I don’t agree. He’s a natural born US citizen, the meaning of which, clearly, is “born a citizen” except to concern trolls from the democrat side.
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.