Vanity: The Constitutional Meaning Of "Natural Born Citizen"

Vanity Essay | 31 January 2012 | sourcery

[GBA]

Wow...that's bad: I don't blame you for ignoring the rest of what I wrote after I got my very first word of my post to you wrong!

"You're conclusion" should have been "Your conclusion"

Sorry about that. Please excuse me while I go Laugh Out Loud! at myself.

Oh well...it's always good not to take one's self too seriously, especially if one can't spell, spellcheck or even get ballpark close with grammar.

Maybe in my case I should just pretend that English is my second language and I still don't have a first one, yet?

[Luircin]

*Whistle*

Quite a post there. It must have taken a lot of hard work to do it. Kudos.

I don’t think that it will convince many of the Cruz supporters, though. Because it speaks against their conservative Messiah, and so it will be rejected outright.

But we’ll see...

[sourcery]

“Does that not mean that they have their citizenship granted by law and therefore they cannot be natural-born citizens?”

Those who become citizens solely by political decree cannot be natural born citizens. However, just because there’s a political decree making you a citizen doesn’t mean you can’t also be a natural born citizen. No law can either make you an NBC, nor prevent you from being one, for the same reason that no law can make true be the same as false—true and false are distinct by “nature,” not because of some statute.

You’re a natural born citizen of a country if you yourself were born in the country, and if both of your parents were citizens (whether natural born or naturalized makes no difference) when you were born.

So modern African Americans who were born in the US to parents who were citizens of any sort at the time are natural born citizens. In other words, almost all of them are.

[Democratic-Republican]

About #115, upon re-reading your question I see a double and a half negative! ...

Does that not mean that they have their citizenship granted by law and therefore they cannot be natural-born citizens?

No. It does NOT mean that. means it was an Amendment. Not a law.

... So depending on exactly what you were trying to ask I'm not sure I replied correctly.

Let's put it this way. On the surface this part of your statement is perfectly true that since they have their citizenship granted by law and therefore they cannot be natural-born citizens.

That is precisely the point that everyone is missing! It is simple ... citizenship granted by law is a plain old citizen, of course that is not a natural born citizen.

Can you please clarify what you meant in #115.

[Democratic-Republican]

SO there, you have PROOF
that Thomas Jefferson,
or for that matter, ANY of the authors of the constitution,
would view TED CRUZ as a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN of the United States,
ON THE DAY HE WAS BORN !

That makes no sense.

First of all, PLEASE! I am begging you to post *without* any formatting next time. PLEASE!

Secondly, you are continually, I mean *continually* interchanging the terms citizen and natural born citizen in your posting. You seem to grab every occurrence of citizen that appears in early documents as some kind of pertinent evidence.

I guess you are in good company since both Rush and Levin also interchange those terms, but it is a mistake and you have to face the most basic fact here ... citizen ≠ natural born citizen ... everyone knows it, everyone has always known it, at least until this mad dash to revisionism began with candidate Dumbo.

You are defeating your own purpose here, your conclusions are not just wrong but involve gluing together completely different things.

Furthermore, why grab documents from the colonial era when the looser Articles of Confederation were operative, and the people were still citizens of their respective states, and long before the Constitutional Convention which ultimately all these States ratified?

And as you imagine Jefferson supporting anything about Cruz/Canada/NBC, well unless your imagination has him possibly sympathizing with Frenchies from Quebec, even that does not hold water since Cruz was born in what was British Canada.

Partial humor aside, I can assure you that if Jefferson actually supported your tenuous conclusion, his protege James Madison would have quickly set him straight. Did you even read the pertinent information right from the horse's mouth?

[Godebert]

Well done. Bookmarked.

[Democratic-Republican]

Arrrghhh.

DD, I meant to ping you to #124 which is about #115

[Yosemitest]

"You're conclusion seems to be in error:"

NOT AT ALL !

"His Mother might or might not have been a citizen at his birth."

WRONG !
Maybe this will shut those TROLLS up (but I doubt it).

Exclusive: Birth Certificate for Ted Cruz's Mother

WHY feed the Piranha, WHEN all they're going to do is CONTINUE their baseless attacks ?
As for the TROLL THEORY:

"Eleanor was naturalized as Canadian citizens before "Ted's" birth."

TROLLS really should do more research before they SPEW such NONSENSE !

Exclusive: Birth Certificate for Ted Cruz's Mother

... The Cruz campaign was responding to inquiries from Breitbart News about a document showing that both of Cruz's parents had been named on a list of voters in Calgary for the 1974 Canadian federal election.

Only Canadian citizens were (and are) able to vote in federal elections.
The lists were compiled through a door-to-door process of "enumeration" by registrars, and were publicized partly so that mistakes could be corrected.

According to Elections Canada–the independent, non-partisan agency that runs Canadian elections- - "voters were sent a copy of the list showing the name, address and occupation of all voters in the relevant poll."

Mistakes were frequent (i.e. "Raphael" instead of "Rafael"), and voters were given the opportunity to fix errors.

Ezra Levant, a Canadian conservative journalist who was born and raised in Calgary, recalled the process of enumeration.

"It was like a census ... they were very quick and non-obtrusive visits, someone standing in your doorstep," he told Breitbart News via e-mail.
"They certainly didn't ask for ID."

"It is not surprising to me that there may be a spelling error in someone's name.
A name appearing on the list would not necessarily indicate that they were a citizen, or that they themselves had even spoken to the enumerator- -
someone else in the household may have spoken for them," Levant added.

The Cruz campaign told Breitbart News on Friday that Cruz's mother had never become a Canadian citizen.

"She was in Canada on a work permit and never became a permanent resident, let alone a citizen," said Jason Johnson, chief strategist for the Cruz campaign.

"She never registered to vote and never applied for Canadian citizenship."

In a subsequent statement to Breitbart News, Johnson added:
"Eleanor was never a citizen of Canada, and she could not have been under the facts or the law.
In short, she did not live in Canada long enough to be a Canadian citizen by the time Cruz was born in 1970:
Canadian law required 5 years of permanent residence, and she moved to Canada in December 1967 - - only 3 years before Senator Cruz's birth."

The campaign could not provide her Canadian work permit.

Canadian immigration authorities could not provide Breitbart News with additional documents, citing Canadian privacy laws.

As for

"You have misstated Jefferson:"

NO AT ALL !
READ IT AGAIN, and VERIFY IT by clicking on the link provided.

Read Thomas Jefferson's own BILL on there "Natural Born Citizen" requirements for the CommonWealth of Virginia:

Thomas Jefferson, A Bill Declaring Who Shall Be Deemed Citizens Of This Commonwealth

May 1779 Virginia Papers 2:476–78

Be it enacted by the General Assembly,

that all white persons born within the territory of this commonwealth
and all who have resided therein two years next before the passing of this act,
and all who shall hereafter migrate into

[Volume 4, Page 488] the same;
and shall before any court of record give satisfactory proof by their own oath or affirmation,
that they intend to reside therein,
and moreover shall give assurance of fidelity to the commonwealth; and all infants WHERESOEVER BORN,
whose father, if living,
or otherwise, whose mother was, a citizen at the time of their birth,
or who migrate hither,
their father, if living,
or otherwise their mother becoming a citizen,
or who migrate hither without father or mother, shall be deemed CITIZENS of this commonwealth,
until they relinquish that character in manner as herein after expressed:
And all others NOT BEING CITIZENS of any the United States of America, shall be deemed aliens.


The clerk of the court shall enter such oath of record,
and give the person taking the same a certificate thereof,
for which he shall receive the fee of one dollar.
And in order to preserve to the citizens of this commonwealth, that natural right,
which all men have of relinquishing the country, in which birth, or other accident may have thrown them,
and, seeking subsistance and happiness wheresoever they may be able, or may hope to find them:
And to declare unequivocably what circumstances shall be deemed evidence of an intention in any citizen to exercise that right,
it is enacted and declared,
that whensoever any citizen of this commonwealth, shall
by word of mouth in the presence of the court of the county, wherein he resides,
or of the General Court,
or by deed in writing, under his hand and seal, executed in the presence of three witnesses,
and by them proved in either of the said courts,
openly declare to the same court,
that he RELINQUISHES the character of a citizen,
and shall DEPART the commonwealth;
or whensoever he shall WITHOUT such declaration DEPART the commonwealth AND ENTYER INTO THE SERVICE OIF ANY OTHER STATE,
not in enmity with this, or any other of the United States of America,
or do any act whereby he shall become a subject or citizen of such state,
such person shall be considered as having exercised his natural right of EXPATRIATING himself,
and shall be deemed NO CITIZEN of this commonwealth from the time of his departure.


SO there, you have PROOF
that Thomas Jefferson,
or for that matter, ANY of the authors of the constitution,
would view TED CRUZ as a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN of the United States,
ON THE DAY HE WAS BORN !

1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives



As for

"Yes, father is living and NOT a citizen"

Read:

TED CRUZ's father, 74-year-old Rafael Bienvenido Cruz.
"I came to this country legally," Cruz's father says.
"I came here with a legal visa, and ... every step of the way, I have been here legally."

In an interview near his home outside Dallas, the elder Cruz says that as a teenager, he fought alongside Fidel Castro's forces to overthrow Cuba's U.S.-backed dictator, Fulgencio Batista.
He was caught by Batista's forces, he says, and jailed and beaten before being released.
It was 1957, and Cruz decided to get out of Cuba by applying to the University of Texas.
Upon being admitted, he adds, he got a four-year student visa at the U.S. Consulate in Havana.

"Then the only other thing that I needed was an exit permit from the Batista government," Cruz recalls.
"A friend of the family, a lawyer friend of my father, basically bribed a Batista official to stamp my passport with an exit permit."

The Rafael Cruz that his son Ted portrays is a kind of Cuban Horatio Alger - - arriving in the U.S. with only $100, learning English on his own and washing dishes seven days a week for 50 cents an hour.

"Since he liked to eat seven days a week, he worked seven days a week, and he paid his way through the University of Texas," Ted Cruz says of his father,
"and then ended up getting a job and eventually going on to start a small business and to work towards the American dream."

Only he did that in Canada, where Ted was born.
His father went there AFTER having earlier obtained political asylum in the U.S. WHEN his student visa ran out.
He then got a green card, he says, and married Ted's mother, an American citizen.
The two of them moved to Canada to work in the oil industry.

"I worked in Canada for eight years," Rafael Cruz says.
"And while I was in Canada, I became a Canadian citizen."

The elder Cruz says he renounced his Canadian citizenship when he finally became a U.S. citizen ...

I can only guess as to the reason it took so long, but probably to keep Cuba from being able to recall him.
As to WHY Rafael Bienvenido Cruz fought alongside Fidel Castro's forces to overthrow Cuba's U.S.-backed dictator, Fulgencio Batista, I can only guess.
I guess he didn't have a choice, being a young teenager fresh out of hight school.

Now for your THEORY:

"not a "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN of the United States" as you want to believe."

READ AGAIN:

"An Un-Naturally Born Non-Controversy":
... The Constitution, federal law, and the historical understanding of the Framers, as well as prior British legal traditions and law, all support this view.
In a recent article in the Harvard Law Review, two former U.S. Solicitor Generals, Paul Clement (who served under President George W. Bush) and Neal Katyal (who served under President Barack Obama) stated:

All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase “natural born Citizen” has a specific meaning:
namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth
with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time.
And Congress has made equally clear from the time of the framing of the Constitution to the current day that,
subject to certain residency requirements on the parents,
someone born to a U.S. citizen parent generally becomes a U.S. citizen without regard to whether the birth takes place in Canada, the Canal Zone, or the continental United States.

Thus, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger would not be eligible to run for president
because the Austrian native had to go through the naturalization process to become a U.S. citizen.

Certainly the Framers of the Constitution held this view of “natural born” citizen.
They had a deep understanding of British common law and applied its precepts, particularly as explained in Blackstone’s Commentaries, throughout the Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Smith v. Alabama (1888) recognized that
“the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that
its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law,
and are to be read in the light of its history.”

Senator Cruz meets all three qualifications in the Constitution to be the president of the United States
if the American people make that choice.

One of those precepts of British law was
that children born to British citizens anywhere in the world,
even outside the dominions of the British Empire,
were “natural born” citizens of the Empire
who owed their allegiance to the Crown.
This historical understanding is explained in great detail by the Supreme Court in a well-known 1898 case, U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.

The First Congress, which included many of the Framers of the Constitution, codified this view of a natural born citizen.
A mere three years after the Constitution was drafted, they passed the Naturalization Act of 1790,
which specified that the children of U.S. citizens born
“out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens.”
The modern version of this Act is found at 8 U.S.C. §1401.
It contains a list of all individuals who are considered “nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.”
Paragraph (g) includes:

A person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien,
and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions
for a period or periods totaling not less than five years,
at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years. 

Ted Cruz was born in Canada in 1970;
his mother, who was a U.S. citizen by birth from Delaware, was in her 30s at the time.
She met Cruz’s father, who was born in Cuba, as a student at Rice University.
These facts show that
Cruz’s family background clearly meets the standard set out in the federal statute for being a natural born citizen who did not have to go through any naturalization process to become a citizen.;
That was also the case for Senator Barry Goldwater, who was born in Arizona before it became a state,
and Governor George Romney, who was born in Mexico.

The bottom line is that Senator Cruz meets all three qualifications in the Constitution to be the president of the United States if the American people make that choice.
The same is true of my wife, who was born in Manila.
Her father, whose family had been in America since shortly after the Pilgrims got to Massachusetts,
was temporarily working abroad for an American company—just like Ted Cruz’s father.

My wife is not likely to run for president,
but there is no question that she—like Ted Cruz, Barry Goldwater, George Romney, and John McCain—is eligible to be president
and to swear an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”


Hans A. von Spakovsky is a a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission and Justice Department lawyer. 
He is the coauthor of “Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk”(Encounter 2012)
and  “Obama’s Enforcer: Eric Holder’s Justice Department” (HarperCollins/Broadside 2014).

SO ....TO SUMMARIZE IT ALL ! ul>
FACT: Cruz’s father’s Cuban nationality at the time of Cruz’s birth, is irrelevant, according to the law at that time,
just so long as he was a LEGAL Immigrant at the time of Ted Cruz's birth,
AND both of Ted Cruz's parents were legally married to each other.

What are the rules for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986?

The 14th Amendment IS a part of the U.S. Constitution and states in SECTION 5.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
So, under that power to legislate, Congress legislated and the President signed into law:
When ONE parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national,
the US citizen parent must have resided in the US for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child,
with five of the years after the age of 14.

... While there were initially rules regarding what the child must do to retain citizenship,
amendments since 1952 HAVE ELIMINATED THESE REQUIREMENTS.

When Ted Cruz was born, his parents were "IN WEDLOCK".

They married, moved to Calgary, Alberta, and in late 1970 had their first and only child, Rafael Edward Cruz.
Cruz was born on December 22, 1970 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada where his parents, Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson and Rafael Bienvenido Cruz.

Cruz's mother was born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware, in a family of three quarters Irish and one quarter Italian descent.
Eleanor Darragh, mother of Ted Cruz, was raised in Delaware, graduated from a Catholic High School (1952) in the U.S., as well as Rice University (1956),
so clearly she meets the residency requirements.

Source

In 1957, Rafael Bienvenido Cruz (Ted Cruz's father) decided to get out of Cuba by applying to the University of Texas.
Upon being admitted, he adds, he got a four-year student visa at the U.S. Consulate in Havana.

"Since he liked to eat seven days a week, he worked seven days a week, and he paid his way through the University of Texas," Ted Cruz says of his father, "and then ended up getting a job and eventually going on to start a small business and to work towards the American dream."

Only he did that in Canada, where Ted was born.
His father went there after having earlier obtained political asylum in the U.S. when his student visa ran out.
He then got a green card, he says, and married Ted's mother, an American citizen.
The two of them moved to Canada to work in the oil industry.

"I worked in Canada for eight years," Rafael Cruz says. "And while I was in Canada, I became a Canadian citizen."

The elder Cruz says he renounced his Canadian citizenship when he finally became a U.S. citizen in 2005 —
48 years after leaving Cuba.
Why did he take so long to do it?
"I don't know. I guess laziness, or — I don't know," he says.

So there is the law for the time Ted Cruz was born,
AND HOW Ted Cruz's PARENTS fulfilled ALL those requirements of the law that time, for Ted Cruz to be a "Natural Born Citizen".
Ted Cruz did NOT NEED a Court and a Judge to "Nationalize" him.

One more thing, listen to a REAL CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER:

MARK LEVIN explains that Ted Cruz IS a natural born citizen ( 7:30 )
Published on Sep 17, 2013

[Enlightened1]

Whatever be the case the DNC and GOPe will shop a federal judge to disqualify Cruz. Then through a brokered convention the delegates will put in Rubio, Jeb, Kasich or even Mitt.

For the record I will never vote for Rubio, Jeb, Kasich or Mitt. No more Establishment trash!

You Cruz supporters need to understand Cruz will never be President. Unfortunately he I’ll be disqualified.

[Yosemitest]

I'm very familiar with 'typos' and have made many myself.
So don;t worry about them, or fore that matter, even what I think.
Only worry about FACTS.

Now as for Trump and TED CRUZ, take it from a previous SUPREME COURT CLERK, with an OUTSTANDING RECORD and an extremely IMPECCABLE REPUTATION.
Read Thomas Sowell endorses Ted Cruz, slams 'overgrown spoiled brat' Donald Trump.
Thomas Sowell in not to be trifled with.
He's one of the greatest legal minds in the United States.

TED CRUZ IS a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN !

And there's NOTHING you can do .... to change that !

[GBA]

What do you call the citizenship of someone who was born here in country to citizen parents?

[Democratic-Republican]

Jeez, the post #128 bowl of spaghetti thrown on the wall argument does not make your case look any better.

• You absolutely fail to distinguish between citizen and natural born citizen, and this is the entire core of your mistaken arguments. It is a well-known concept that everyone knows, that everyone has always known and yet you want to revise our entire history to excuse your favorite candidate. You have rounded up every mention of citizen in every document no matter how unrelated and through it into a blender and hit puree. Unfortunately the result is a thick gooey shake that is totally undrinkable.

• Nowhere do you present a list of previous Presidents, Candidates, or persons running for nomination that could be examples of your premise that foreigners and partial foreigners can run for President.

• I gave you the information about Madison himself striking the 1790 NBC language for the express purpose of preventing people such as yourself from making the mistake you continue to make. That mistake appears again, just above in #128. Even Madison cannot convince you of what the Founders meant?

• You are continually promoting Congress as a body empowered to define NBC, a term used in the Constitution authored by We The People, not We The Congress. A simple mental exercise should convince you how wrong this is. Can Congress free the slaves and make them NBC? Nope. Never happened. Can a law redefine High Crimes and Misdemeanors? Of course not. That undefined phrase is only considered by the Congress at impeachment time, and not any way tied to what particular statutory law exists at the time. Just think about allowing them the ability to define Arms and Speech and Press as well. This is downright dangerous and that alone should give you pause. If you bothered to read the Federalist Papers you would realize the intricate set of checks and balances that they designed should not be circumvented by you because of your passion of the moment.

• You toss in appeals to authority to wonderful people like Sowell and formerly sane people like Levin, but for what purpose? Notice one thing, you are going to those who took a pass or outright surrendered to political correctness on candidate Dumbo, the FIRST known half-foreigner ever running for President, and they are now completely locked into their mistake. So today, faced with an even more obvious egregious case, another half-foreigner but this time born in a foreign country, what else are they gonna do? They blew it before bigtime and will naturally blow it again now.

May I ask you something? Do you agree that the President has higher qualifications than all other offices?

Is there any difference to you between citizen and natural born citizen?

Are you aware of where the clause originated and why?

Article II Facts :: Constitutional Convention.

Alexander Hamilton's suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

John Jay wrote a letter to General Washington, the President of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention ..

"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."

Surely you see that the affirmative change from citizen to natural born citizen carries weight and substance that a mere "citizen" will not suffice. And surely you see that the object is removing "foreigners" from the pool of people.

As the Supreme Court has punted this back to us to kick around you most certainly *do* have the opportunity to vote for a foreigner for President, even if they were born in Afghanistan, Russia and Iran. How awesome. However, you cannot rewrite our historical knowledge. That's just plain insulting. Those who are seeking approbation for their choice of voting for a foreigner should not expect it. Just say it loudly and proudly that you are voting for the FIRST ever foreign born candidate for President and stop beating around the bush.

[Yosemitest]

It makes PERFECT SENSE.
YOU just DON'T AGREE with it !


Take a long look at our 1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives who voted and PASSED The Naturalization Act of 1790.
Let's read it , too !

United States Congress, "An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" (March 26, 1790).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled,
That any Alien being a free white person,
who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years,
may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States
wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least,
and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court  that
he is a person of good character,
and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law
to support the Constitution of the United States,
which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer,
and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon;
and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. 


And the children of such person so naturalized,
dwelling within the United States,
being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization,
shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. 

And 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: 
Provided also, that
no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid,
except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

Now think about that.
MANY of our FOUNDING FATHERS were members of the 1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives,
who voted and PASSED The Naturalization Act of 1790.
Then later in history in 1802, when the The Naturalization Act of 1790
was repealed and replaced, some of our FOUNDING FATHERS who were still members of Congress RESTORED the basic provisions of the original 1790 law AGAIN,

except for the period of residency before naturalization.
The residency requirement, that is, the amount of time the immigrant had to reside, or live, in the United States, was put back to five years, as it had been in 1795.

After Jefferson became president (in 1801), the 1798 naturalization law was repealed, or overturned (in 1802).
Also Notice the signature blocks at the bottom of this:



1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives

SO THINK ABOUT THAT ... LONG AND HARD.
It IS THE LAW, whether you like it or not !
Now, for your statement:

"but it is a mistake
and you have to face the most basic fact here
... citizen ≠ natural born citizen
... everyone knows it,
everyone has always known it, "

You could NOT be MORE WRONG, even if you tried !
VERY FEW PEOPLE believe that.
Only those recently out of the public education system believe that garbage, because that what the teachers' union has pushed.
Our children today ARE NOT TAUGHT OUR HISTORY, let alone the struggles our FOUNDING FATHERS went through to make our country was it WAS !
We must return to our FOUNDING, and we must do it soon!

Now read this, because very, very few people believe the garbage coming out of the LAME STREAM MEDIA today !
More and more, people are looking up the FACTS and the LAW for themselves.

On the Meaning of "Natural Born Citizen",
MAR 11, 2015, Commentary by Neal Katyal & Paul Clement

... While the field of candidates for the next presidential election is still taking shape,
at least one potential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz, was born in a Canadian hospital to a U.S. citizen mother.^15×
15. See Monica Langley, Ted Cruz, Invoking Reagan, Angers GOP Colleagues But Wins Fans Elsewhere, Wall St. J. (Apr. 18, 2014, 11:36 PM), http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303873604579494001552603692.
Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a "natural born Citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution.
Indeed, because his father had also been resident in the United States, Senator Cruz would have been a "natural born Citizen" even under the Naturalization Act of 1790.
Similarly, in 2008, one of the two major party candidates for President, Senator John McCain, was born outside the United States on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to a U.S. citizen parent.^16×
16. See Michael Dobbs, John McCain's Birthplace, Wash. Post: Fact Checker (May 20, 2008, 6:00 AM), http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/05/john_mccains_birthplace.html [http://perma.cc/5DKV-C7VE].
Despite a few spurious suggestions to the contrary, there is no serious question that Senator McCain was fully eligible to serve as President,
wholly apart from any murky debate about the precise sovereign status of the Panama Canal Zone at the time of Senator McCain's birth.^17×
17. See, e.g., Laurence H. Tribe & Theodore B. Olson, Opinion Letter, Presidents and Citizenship, 2 J.L. 509 (2012).
Indeed, this aspect of Senator McCain's candidacy was a source of bipartisan accord.
The U.S. Senate unanimously agreed that Senator McCain was eligible for the presidency,
resolving that any interpretation of the natural born citizenship clause as limited to those born within the United States was "inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the 'natural born Citizen' clause of the Constitution of the United States,
as evidenced by the First Congress's own statute defining the term 'natural born Citizen.' "^18×
18. S. Res. 511, 110th Cong. (2008).
And for the same reasons, both Senator Barry Goldwater and Governor George Romney were eligible to serve as President although neither was born within a state.
Senator Goldwater was born in Arizona before its statehood and was the Republican Party's presidential nominee in 1964,^19×
19. See Bart Barnes, Barry Goldwater, GOP Hero, Dies, Wash. Post, May 30, 1998, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/may98/goldwater30.htm [http://perma.cc/K2MG-3PZL].
and Governor Romney was born in Mexico to U.S. citizen parents and unsuccessfully pursued the Republican nomination for President in 1968.^20×
20. See David E. Rosenbaum, George Romney Dies at 88; A Leading G.O.P. Figure, N.Y. Times, July 27, 1995, http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/27/obituaries/george-romney-dies-at-88-a-leading-gop-figure.html.

There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle.
The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better.
Fortunately, the Constitution is refreshingly clear on these eligibility issues.
To serve, an individual must be at least thirty-five years old and a "natural born Citizen."
Thirty-four and a half is not enough and, for better or worse, a naturalized citizen cannot serve.
But as Congress has recognized since the Founding, a person born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is generally a U.S. citizen from birth with no need for naturalization.
And the phrase "natural born Citizen" in the Constitution encompasses all such citizens from birth.
Thus, an individual born to a U.S. citizen parent - - whether in California or Canada or the Canal Zone - - is a U.S. citizen from birth
and is fully eligible to serve as President if the people so choose.



---



* Paul and Patricia Saunders Professor of Law, Georgetown University.
** Distinguished Lecturer in Law, Georgetown University; Partner, Bancroft PLLC.

[Democratic-Republican]

See post #132 please.

[Democratic-Republican]

My FRiend Yosemitest, wow, just wow. You are something else. I said this ...

"but it is a mistake and you have to face the most basic fact here ...

citizen ≠ natural born citizen

... everyone knows it, everyone has always known it, "

To which you replied ...

You could NOT be MORE WRONG, even if you tried !
VERY FEW PEOPLE believe that.

You are a special case. I've seen dedication but this takes the cake. Apparently everyone for 228 years were mistaken and you figured it all out now.

I even showed you that Madison himself struck the NBC portion of the 1790 law that you continue to post, and he even warned that people might do exactly what you are doing, right here, right now!

Okay, that makes you a higher than authority than the main man himself. LOL! A person who makes a mistake can be honorable and admit it and then correct it. Other types just carry on as if it never happened.

I'm quite sure now that others have seen enough to be convinced of where the arguments of merit lie and where the arguments of tangled spaghetti are.

[Yosemitest]

"Whatever be the case the DNC and GOPe will shop a federal judge to disqualify Cruz."

They can 'shop' all they want.
But it will NEVER be heard in Court, and Trump knows it ! That's WHY he's raising this "STRAW MAN" side show !

READ AGAIN the United States Constitution, pay particular attention to U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8.

The Congress shall have Power ... To make ALL Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,
and ALL other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Also, pay particular attention to U.S. Constitution - Article I, section 5

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, ...

As I have commented on before and supported with links, in the article Akhil Reed Amar, author of CNN's Why Ted Cruz is eligible to be president wrote:

" ... The Constitution's 12th Amendment clearly says
that Congress counts the electoral votes at a special session;
and thus Congress is constitutionally authorized to refuse to count any electoral votes
that Congress considers invalid.


Elsewhere, Article I, section 5 of the Constitution makes clear
that each house of Congress may "judge" whether a would-be member of that house
meets the constitutional eligibility rules for that house.
Suppose Mr. Smith wants to go to Washington as a senator.
He wins election in his home state.
But the Constitution says a senator must be 30 years old.

If a dispute arises about Smith's age, about whether there a proper birth certificate and what it says,
the Constitution clearly says the Senate is "the judge" of Smith's birth certificate dispute.

Similarly, for presidential elections the Constitution's structure makes Congress the judge of any birth certificate dispute
or any other issue of presidential eligibility.
Congress cannot fabricate new presidential eligibility rules
but it is the judge of the eligibility rules prescribed in the Constitution.

Thus, ordinary courts should butt out, now and forever.
They have no proper role here, because the Constitution itself makes Congress the special judge.
In legal jargon, the issue is a "nonjusticiable political question."

NOTE: nonjusticiable political question

Legal questions are deemed to be justiciable, while political questions are nonjusticiable. [Huhn, Wilson R. American Constitutional Law Volume 1. 2016.]
One scholar explained:
The political question doctrine holds
that some questions, in their nature, are fundamentally political, and not legal,
and if a question is fundamentally political ... then the court will refuse to hear that case.
It will claim that it doesn't have jurisdiction.
And it will leave that question to some other aspect of the political process to settle out.
- - John E. Finn, professor of government, 2006 [2]
A ruling of nonjusticiability will ultimately prohibit the issue that is bringing the case before the court from being able to be heard in a court of law.
In the typical case where there is a finding of nonjusticiability due to the political question doctrine,
the issue presented before the court is usually so specific
that the Constitution gives ALL power to one of the coordinate political branches,
or at the opposite end of the spectrum, the issue presented is so vague
that the United States Constitution does not even consider it.
A court can only decide issues based on law.
The Constitution dictates the different legal responsibilities of each respective branch of government.
If there is an issue where the court does not have the Constitution as a guide, there are no legal criteria to use.
When there are no specific constitutional duties involved, the issue is to be decided through the democratic process.
The court will not engage in political disputes.

A constitutional dispute that requires knowledge
of a non-legal character
or the use of techniques not suitable for a court or explicitly assigned by the Constitution to the U.S. Congress, or the President of the United States,
is a political question, which judges customarily refuse to address.

Now, let's take a close look at the word "NATURALIZATION", its history, and FROM WHERE it was derived .
What is the root word of "Naturalization" ?

"Naturalize" !
"admit (an alien) to rights of a citizen," 1550s (implied in naturalized),
from natural (adj.) in its etymological sense of "by birth" + -ize;
in some instances from Middle French naturaliser, from natural.
Of things, from 1620s; of plants or animals, from 1796.
Related: Naturalizing.

Not only could the Founding Father define "natural born citizen", BUT ... THE FOUNDING FATHERS DID DEFINE IT !


The Naturalization Act of 1790, let's read it !

United States Congress, "An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" (March 26, 1790).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled,
That any Alien being a free white person,
who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years,
may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States
wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least,
and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court  that
he is a person of good character,
and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law
to support the Constitution of the United States,
which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer,
and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon;
and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. 


And the children of such person so naturalized,
dwelling within the United States,
being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization,
shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. 

And 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: 
Provided also, that
no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid,
except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

Take a look at the original one WRITTEN BY our FOUNDING FATHERS,
and VERIFY IT FOR YOURSELF in the list of NAMES of the members of our FIRST CONGRESS !



1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives

Finally, read the latest from links provided by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the government agency that oversees lawful immigration to the United States.

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

READ IT VERY CLOSELY.

Constitutional Topic: Citizenship

... Citizenship is mentioned in
Article 1, Section 2,
Article 1, Section 3,
Article 1, Section 8,
Article 2, Section 1,
and in the 14th Amendment
and several subsequent amendments.

If you're going to be involved in government in the United States, citizenship is a must.
To be a Senator or Representative, you must be a citizen of the United States.
To be President, not only must you be a citizen, but you must also be natural-born.
Aside from participation in government, citizenship is an honor bestowed upon people by the citizenry of the United States when a non-citizen passes the required tests and submits to an oath.

Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen?
Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way:
"All persons 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."
But even this does not get specific enough.
As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.
The Constitution authorizes the Congress to create clarifying legislation in
Section 5 of the 14th Amendment;
the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4,
also allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization,

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution.
Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"


• Anyone born inside the United States *
  * There is an exception in the law - - the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.
  This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
• Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
  
• Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
  
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
  
• Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
  
• Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
  
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
  
• A final, historical condition:
  a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President.
These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.

Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such as
Puerto Rico (8 USC 1402),
Alaska (8 USC 1404),
Hawaii (8 USC 1405),
the U.S. Virgin Islands (8 USC 1406),
and Guam (8 USC 1407).
Each of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date,
and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date.
For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952).
Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States.
Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.

The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama.
In 8 USC 1403, the law states that
anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen,
was "declared" to be a United States citizen.
Note that the terms "natural-born" or "citizen at birth" are missing from this section.

In 2008, when Arizona Senator John McCain ran for president on the Republican ticket, some theorized that
because McCain was born in the Canal Zone,
he was not actually qualified to be president.
However, it should be noted that section 1403 was written to apply to a small group of people to whom section 1401 did not apply.
McCain is a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c):
"a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States
and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person."
Not everyone agrees that this section includes McCain - - but absent a court ruling either way, we must presume citizenship.

U.S. Nationals

A "national" is a person who is considered under the legal protection of a country, while not necessarily a citizen.
National status is generally conferred on persons who lived in places acquired by the U.S. before the date of acquisition.
A person can be a national-at-birth under a similar set of rules for a natural-born citizen.
U.S. nationals must go through the same processes as an immigrant to become a full citizen.
U.S. nationals who become citizens are not considered natural-born.

(Continued)

As to your comment:

"Then through a brokered convention the delegates will put in Rubio, Jeb, Kasich or even Mitt."
You Cruz supporters need to understand Cruz will never be President.
Unfortunately he'll be disqualified.

You just can NOT get it past your OWN MIS-CONCEIVED THEORY.
But the LAW and the CONSTITUTION IS CLEAR !
TED CRUZ, as many before me have PROVEN, IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN !

As to your comment:

"For the record I will never vote for Rubio, Jeb, Kasich or Mitt.
No more Establishment trash !"

Well, at least we agree on that !
But as far as a 'BROKERED CONVENTION', I disagree on the outcome you suggest!
They may try it, but they WILL NOT succeed !
They're just as scared of a 'BROKERED CONVENTION' as we are, and for very good reasons !
They don't want to lose power, and they don't want to be laughed at, or made fun of.
Once their fear is seen and the outcome gets more in focus, their campaign dollars will VANISH !
It'll be the biggest side show to watch.
DemocRATs and the LAME STREAM MEDIA will have a field day poking fun at it.

[Yosemitest]

IRRELEVANT !

[Yosemitest]

It was Settled in 1790 and AGAIN in 1802!

In 1798, the law on naturalization was changed again.
The Federalists feared that many new immigrants favored their political foes, the Democratic-Republicans.
The Federalists, therefore, wanted to reduce the political influence of immigrants.
To do so, the Federalists, who controlled Congress, passed a law
that required immigrants to wait fourteen years before becoming naturalized citizens and thereby gaining the right to vote.
The 1798 act also barred naturalization for citizens of countries at war with the United States.
At the time, the United States was engaged in an unofficial, undeclared naval war with France.
The French government thought the United States had taken the side of Britain in the ongoing conflict between Britain and France.
A related law passed in 1798, the Alien Enemy Act, gave the president the power during a time of war to arrest or deport any alien thought to be a danger to the government.

After Jefferson became president (in 1801), the 1798 naturalization law was repealed, or overturned (in 1802).
The basic provisions of the original 1790 law WERE RESTORED except for the period of residency before naturalization.
The residency requirement, that is, the amount of time the immigrant had to reside, or live, in the United States, was put back to five years, as it had been in 1795.

The 1802 law remained the basic naturalization act until 1906, with two notable exceptions.
In 1855, the wives of American citizens were automatically granted citizenship.
In 1870, people of African descent could become naturalized citizens, in line with constitutional amendments passed after the American Civil War (1861-65)
that banned slavery and gave African American men the right to vote.
Other laws were passed to limit the number of people (if any) allowed to enter the United States from different countries,
especially Asian countries, but these laws did not affect limits on naturalization.

Within a decade of adopting the Constitution, immigration, and naturalization in particular, had become hot political issues.
They have remained political issues for more than two centuries.

Did you know ...

Naturalization laws relate to the process of immigrants becoming a citizen.
Other laws have provided for losing citizenship -
- by getting married!
In 1907, Congress passed a law that said a woman born in the United States (and therefore a citizen) would lose her citizenship
if she married an alien (who was therefore not a citizen).
In 1922, two years after women won the right to vote,
this provision was repealed and a woman's citizenship status was separated from her husband's.

Also Notice the signature blocks at the bottom of this:



1st United States Congress, 21-26 Senators and 59-65 Representatives

[Enlightened1]

Don't believe me.  Here are some links for you.

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/266039-attorney-files-birther-lawsuit-against-cruz

and

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/269281-trump-supporters-file-federal-lawsuit-challenging-cruzs

and

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/ted-cruz-citizenship-lawsuit/424425/

and

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/269281-trump-supporters-file-federal-lawsuit-challenging-cruzs

and

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Campaigns-Quietly-Prep-Possible/2016/02/16/id/714492/

and from Fox News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkUNf1wPYEI

and

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/12/22/a_brokered_convention_in_2016_why_it_might_happen_what_it_might_mean_129119.html

and

http://www.wsj.com/articles/flirting-with-a-chaotic-gop-convention-1451345621

and

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/brokered-republican-convention-cleveland-219306

and

http://www.12newsnow.com/story/31194724/rubio-eyes-brokered-convention-after-nh-setback

 

[Democratic-Republican]

IRRELEVANT !

What? One word. No answers to any questions at all?

P.S. Please, I'm begging to you to STOP copy/pasting those enormous walls of text to me because they wipe out the "My Comments" feed.

You can write these giant posts to yourself "Yosemitest" and then in another message ping me to that post ( and I'm sure others who feel the same way ). PLEASE Be courteous to your fellow FReepers.