Posted on 04/03/2016 9:59:33 AM PDT by Zenjitsuman
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfHxyO9UEAEq2SG.jpg
Why do we seem to have another Obama on our hands.
Why isn't Cruz made to unseal his banking records His dealings with Cuba His Mothers birth records, her INS records showing she was inside America within a year of his birth?
Rogers v. Bellei
taxcontrol has seen that case. taxcontrol is an unreasonable crank, waste of time, etc.
Citing naturalization statute to claim that a person made a citizen by that statute is not a naturalized citizen is stupid.
Read Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815
Cruz had scholarships and student loans. If he released his grades it would seem like bragging. He graduated Suma cum laud and his brilliance has been noted by his professors, such as Alan Dershowitz.
Why are Donald Trumps banking records sealed? Why haven’t we seen his medical records? Why hasn’t he shown us his complete IRS tax records? Where are Trumps college grades and all the records of his draft deferments?
Why am I asking these stupid questions? I hope you see how ignorant it sounds to ask them about any of our candidates. We aren’t a bunch of stupid liberals!
The founders must have put in Article 1 Section 8 clause 4 for some reason. If they didn’t mean anything about “rules of naturalization”, why did they put the words in there?
BTW, in the very first acts of Congress, you know, the Congress that actually had the founding father in that congress, passed the very first “Naturalization Act” of 1790. That is in keeping with Article 1 Section 8 Clause 4 and was signed into law by none other than George Washington. And in that very first act, they clearly stated who would be considered natural born citizens. And guess what, they didn’t have to be born on US Soil.
Here is the section of that law that sets the precedence:
The Act also establishes the United States citizenship of certain children of citizens, born abroad, without the need for naturalization: “the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States”.
Now before we go any further, note several things with this law:
1) THE FOUNDING FATHERS specifically called those born outside the boundaries of the US to qualified parents, as natural born citizens. So any definition of NBC which requires birth on US soil is AUTOMATICALLY outside the founders intent.
2) THE FOUNDING FATHERS didn’t even specify that the father had to be a US citizen, only that they had to reside in the US. So any definition of NBC which requires the father to be a US citizen also is AUTOMATICALLY outside the founders intent.
3) THE FOUNDING FATHERS specifically gave Congress the exclusive and enumerated power to deal with ALL rules of naturalization. Further the very first congress exercised that authority to define who qualifies as NBC. Therefore, any argument that says the Congress can’t alter the definition of NBC is AUTOMATICALLY outside the founders intent.
4) I also hear that the Naturalization Act of 1790 was repealed and replaced as an argument against using that act to understand the intent of the founding fathers. Those that attempt to use that argument miss the point - CONGRESS HAS AUTHORITY OVER ALL RULES OF NATURALIZATION. And that the founding fathers used that authority to change the definition on NBC. The authority is clearly there. And if you follow the line of naturalization acts from the first to now you get to Title 8 Section 1401 - Nationals and Citizens of the United States at birth.
5) Lastly, others argue about definitions attempting to cite Vattel or others as the source for their logical fallacy of appeal to authority. The problem is that it is an attempt to guess what the founding fathers thought. The first acts of Congress show what the founding fathers DID. And what they did was to define NBC status so that parentage was more important than location.
Thank you for citing a case that supports my position as SCOTUS held:
Held: Congress has the power to impose the condition subsequent of residence in this country on appellee, who does not come within the Fourteenth Amendment’s definition of citizens as those “born or naturalized in the United States,” and its imposition is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or unlawful
Call or right Trump, he likely published his grades in a book. Trump fessed up about his sex life, but why is Cruz name and phone number in a Dead Madams phone book, and he has a legal block on her lawyer revealing it?
I bet the Dems will get it all released, for sure.
Lyin Ted. Ask Trump he love bragging about his accomplishments. Cruz has no accomplishments in the Senate.
“the fact that they were in Canada some 3 years prior to Cruz’s birth and this brings up his eligibility to become president. On the basis that for foreign born children to US parents to be considered US citizens at least one parent who is a US citizen has to have been in the US one year prior to the child’s birth. If the accounts of Cruz’s parents are correct, his mother, being the parent who determined his US citizenship based on her being a US citizen, was not in the US a year prior to his birth as required by US law.”
So can someone tell me Cruz’s answer to this law?
.another Obama on our hands...
A little worse actually. There are natural born, then a step down is Obama with citizen mother and foreign father born in USA, and now a deeper level with foreign born Cruz to citizen mother and foreign father.
That might explain why INS stuff on his mom is sealed.
P
In other words Bellei was a naturalized citizen, not under the 14th Amendment.
Bellei’s citizenship was governed by the exact same provision that Cruz is.
LOL I meant the part about the phone number ;)
If you read what was HELD ... you know, the actual legal outcome of the suit, Congress has very wide authority to establish the rules of naturalization, and that includes who is a citizen at birth, and does not need naturalization.
No where in the ruling (i.e the held portion) was it said that Bellei was a naturalized citizen.
The case wouldn’t exist if he wasn’t a naturalized citizen.
He wasn’t a naturalized citizen. He was an NBC who failed to comply with the requirements established by Congress to maintain his citizenship and as such, lost his citizenship.
Zzzzzzz.
He failed to comply with a NATURALIZATION statute.
Somewhere on this thread it’s stated that cruz hired the same law firm obamo did to seal his records. I don’t have time to look for the post now but I will look later.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3378862/posts?q=1&;page=1
Wait. What?
“....but why is Cruz name and phone number in a Dead Madams phone book, and he has a legal block on her lawyer revealing it?”
By “he” do you mean cruz has a legal block?
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.