You argue against Madison and Hamilton, not me.
Minor v. Happersett, in context, ^did^ define NBC as born on US soil to both a man and a woman who were citizens at the time of birth (not just ONE parent, but both). The 14th then reset that to be both parents “in service to the US”, so that military and displaced patriots were included.
That is moot now that the electorate has lowered the bar to “whomever we elect” (post facto eligibility). Until and unless Obamugabe is impeached and removed on ineligiblity rules, Cruz is, most certainly, eligible...in an electoral manner.
WW, we have no continuing debate/argument regarding Cruz. We agree that he is eligible according to the electoral process and precedence previously provided.
Personally, I am disappointed that so many Americans are willing to ignore history for the sake of expediency.
Neither defined natural born citizenship.
Search their writings all you want, they do not offer a definition.
Minor v. Happersett, in context, ^did^ define NBC as born on US soil to both a man and a woman who were citizens at the time of birth (not just ONE parent, but both).
It did not make a definition, either in its context or on an absolute basis.
It simply said that no definition of natural born could exclude Minor, since she would fit under even the narrowest conceivable definition.
The court did not say that unless one was precisely situated as Minor was one could not be a natural born citizen.
“v. Happersett, in context, ^did^ define NBC as born on US soil to both a man and a woman who were citizens at the time of birth (not just ONE parent, but both). “
I’ve already posted the part you leave out which is the court said that was one definition but not the only definition.
You still haven’t read that decision or else you wouldn’t have made such an ignorant and stupid claim as that.
That is moot now that the electorate has lowered the bar to “whomever we elect” (post facto eligibility). Until and unless Obamugabe is impeached and removed on ineligiblity rules, Cruz is, most certainly, eligible...in an electoral manner.
***The 20th amendment states “if a pres elect fails to qualify”, so it is inherent in the statement that a president has qualified, was eligible. That was the job of the SCOTUS and they sat on their hands in the manner you describe. It was SCOTUS who failed us.
WW, we have no continuing debate/argument regarding Cruz. We agree that he is eligible according to the electoral process and precedence previously provided.
***That precedence was provided by Obama. He whittled away at the constitution and got away with it, so now there will be others trying to drive trucks through the loophole he created.