Ted Cruz Campaign Releases Mother's Birth Certificate to Satisfy Unsatisfiable Crazy People

Slate ^ | January 8, 2016 | Jim Newell

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Unless he himself becomes president, Donald Trump should serve in the next administration as Special Envoy for Getting People to Dig Up Birth Certificates for Public Consumption, because he's hella good at it. His speculation about Obama's birthplace prompted the President to release his long-form birth certificate in 2011. And now, after only a few days of muttering about Cruz's eligibility to become president, he's prompted Cruz to release… his mother's?

Wait, it makes sense.

As best we can tell there are two main strands of Cruz birtherism. One is that the Supreme Court has never directly ruled on the meaning of the Constitution's "natural born citizen" requirement. Even though it is understood by experts to mean "U.S. citizen at birth," as Cruz was, some opportunistic critics, such as Trump, have been warning about the phrase's not-totally-determined meaning and how that could open the door to distracting legal cases if Cruz becomes the nominee.

The other is that maybe Cruz was not a U.S. citizen at birth, because his mother did not meet the requirements for transmitting citizenship to her child. As we wrote yesterday, "Those born abroad between 1952 and 1986 earned U.S. citizenship at birth if their parents were married and one parent was a U.S. citizen who spent 10 years in the United States with five of those coming after age 14. Cruz's parents were married, and his mother meets the citizenship requirements." This gives Cruz birthers another person's life to inspect: that of Eleanor Cruz, the senator's mother. Democratic congressman Alan Grayson (yes, there are Democratic Cruz birthers) has said that the eligibility suit he's supposedly prepping against Cruz would focus on Eleanor. As U.S. News reported this week:.....

[BillM]

Under Canadian law he gave up his Canadian citizenship the instant he voted in another country. I know because that is what happened to my sister.

[grania]

My example parallels Cruz’s. Yours does not. My scenario COULD result if Cruz is indeed a natural born citizen. Yours has nothing to do with that circumstance, as your scenario has nothing to do with those impacted by the citizenship rules under scrutiny.

[Godebert]

Natural Law as defined by what or whom?

As defined by The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

[RC one]

I believe the same was true of an American citizen who voted in a foreign election. I think it was changed in 1992. The whole idea of naturalization is (or was) to ensure there are no divided loyalties. A natural born citizen, by nature of his or citizenship, would have no divided loyalties. My understanding of the 14th amendment leads me to believe that this is why the term "natural born citizen" was used in establishing the qualifications to be POTUS. It was to ensure that there would never be a POTUS with any sort of divided loyalties (not that I think that Ted Cruz has divided loyalties mind you).

The following words were spoken by Teddy Roosevelt on the subject of divided loyalties and citizenship:

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all … The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic … There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

that's all I really want to say about that.

[Cboldt]

-- Imagine the nonsense scenario where North Korea enacted legislation that extended North Korean citizenship to anyone born in the United States or to a US citizen parent. That would give every American dual citizenship. Would we all become ineligible to become President in such a case? --

My question was solely on the operation of US law. I agree with you that foreign laws don't have play. Imagine the nonsense scenario where Congress enacted legislation that extended US Citizenship to anyone born in North Korea. That would make every North Korean eligible under the NBC aspect of the US Constitution, following the premise that Congress can define NBC by statute.

-- Ted Cruz did not need to revoke his Canadian dual dual citizenship either. --

I've said the same as devil's advocate. Then, assuming he won the election, we would have a Canadian citizen for president, eh!

[randita]

Not to be flippant, but e.g. God reveals one meaning of “natural born” to you and a different meaning of “natural born” to me. Who determines which meaning is the correct one?

Who gets to divide the baby?

[xander]

Thanks for clarifying that. I completely missed the double standard aspect. Quite true.

Sad, this is now an important issue when Obama was given a complete pass prior to his being elected. Doesn’t excuse the failure of our electorate to do their job and I’m pleased to see this issue run its course to eliminate any doubts and strengthen our candidates on such an important election.

[Duchess47]

That is without a doubt one of the silliest things I have read in defense of Cruz.

[Mariner]

Hmmm.

I don't think that people who demand documented proof of eligibility are crazy.

I believe those who don't are the crazy ones.

[Mariner]

"He DOES need to address this NOW though."

He did. He showed he is a US Citizen by birth.

For those who believe the meaning of NBC should be litigated, I say go ahead.

I too would like to see a USSC decision on the matter. Until then, as far as I can tell, Cruz is eligible.

[butterdezillion]

Trump and Cruz could use this to find out whether the US has already had a foreign-born and definitely INELIGIBLE candidate inaugurated as POTUS, since his only US citizenship is through naturalization (if Obama naturalized).

When Cruz gets IA primary votes, Trump should sue over Cruz’ ineligibility. Cruz should use as part of his defense the precedent of Obama being born outside the US (as evidenced by the Hawaii registrar refusing to verify for AZ SOS Ken Bennett the birth facts claimed on his non-valid HI BC). The issue would be relevant if the lawsuit claims that nobody born outside the US is eligible, regardless of whether they were a US citizen at birth, and Cruz making this assertion would be a reasonable legal move because if the DeVattel standards are used by SCOTUS it would be about the only defense he could use.

If Cruz and Trump could get discovery there is a LOT they could bring into public knowledge. A LOT.And then when one or the other of them becomes POTUS they will have what they need to begin cleaning out the cockroaches and traitors within the system and the current regime...

The issue should not be feared. It should be welcomed as an avenue to finally get the truth and execute justice. Good reason for BOTH guys to work together. The only thing that would be dangerous would be if people like Levin once again throw evidentiary standards out the window and hysterically attack those who resist the threatened media’s narratives (given to them by Obama’s handlers).

[AFret.]

The only thing that would be dangerous would be if people like Levin once again throw evidentiary standards out the window and hysterically attack those who resist the threatened media’s narratives (given to them by Obama’s handlers).

Well stated and spot on..Levin is an obama enabler..and a putz.

[butterdezillion]

The radio comglomerates were threatened in October of 2008, that anybody allowing on-air discussion about Obama’s ineligibility or Muslim leanings would lose their careers, with it implied that they or their loved ones could also lose their lives.

Levin, Beck, Malkin, etc - anybody who gets a paycheck from those radio companies or who depends on them to distribute their radio shows - were thus threatened into saying whatever Obama’s owners wanted them to say. A technique Saddam would be proud of, because people would believe the hostages’ statements because they already had credibility with the “conservatives” and nobody was allowed to know that they are hostage.

That is one of the stories that America HAS to finally deal with. I’m pretty sure Trump knows what happened, which is why he immediately set out to tell the world he doesn’t need Fox, and to display that Fox is run by the same people who run Obama the puppet and all the other media sources. It’s a different world now than it was when the public knew nothing about who owns the media (even so-called “conservative media”).

Trump is acting as if he knows what’s going on and means to do something real about it. I hope he will sue Cruz, in cooperation with Cruz, to finally deal with the coup of 2008.

[RetiredArmy]

The Hussein released birth certificate was a sham. It wasn’t real. Like everything concerning the muzzlum in the house on Pennsylvanian Avenue, it is a lie. His entire existence is a lie. Where he was born. When he was born. I would bet at this point that his college transcripts do not exist because no one in the school ever heard of him. Someone, anyone would have heard or known him, had a class with him, something, anything!!! But, he was not there. It was a lie like everything else. His only school transcripts available might be his fifth grade transcripts from Suicide Bomber High School in Indonesia.

[Godebert]

Not to be flippant, but e.g. God reveals one meaning of “natural born” to you and a different meaning of “natural born” to me. Who determines which meaning is the correct one? Who gets to divide the baby?

The meaning as understood by the Founding Fathers is the one that matters. That definition was found in The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)

[MeshugeMikey]

“.I’m doing this for the good of Ted....” fat chance

[randita]

At least two meanings were “understood” by the Founding Fathers.

This one:

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

And this one:

“United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject” (January 29, 1795)”

We don’t get to pick and choose which one we like as the 1795 one repealed (revoked, annuled) the 1790 one. The 1795 act has no reference to “natural born”.

For reference, see http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

[John Valentine]

First, it’s not silly, it’s basically just a recitation of the facts, and second, it is not in defense of Cruz. Cruz has done nothing that needs defending.

[John Valentine]

Then, assuming he won the election, we would have a Canadian citizen for president, eh!

Yes, according to the Canadians.

And if Trump were elected, we'd have Brit, according to them.

There is no issue here.

[Cboldt]

You aks a good question there. Politics is like war. The winner is usually whoever has the bigger army. It really is that simple.

As long as there is a plausible way to spin the facts into the conclusion you want, you won't lose supporters. There is no "right" other than "might."