Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fordham Law Prof: Ted Cruz Not 'Natural Born' Under 'Originalist' View of Constitution
Breitbart ^ | 01/11/2016 | Breitbart News

Posted on 01/11/2016 8:19:23 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans

Thomas Lee, a professor of constitutional law and international law at Fordham Law School, writes in the Los Angeles Times that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)97% would not be considered a "natural born citizen" under an originalist view of the Constitution.

From the LA Times:

Under either a textualist or a "living Constitution" theory, Cruz is a "natural born Citizen," eligible to be president; under an originalist view, however, he isn't. It's the conservative theory that would exclude the conservative Cruz from presidential eligibility.

To an originalist, a "natural born Citizen" is a person who is a citizen of the United States under "natural" principles of law in 1788. Two such principles were then in play in the U.S. Jus soli — the law of soil — was the principle that a child was subject or citizen of the sovereign who ruled the land or seas on which the child was born. Jus soli was viewed as a part of the common law of England, which was adopted by the American states. Jus sanguinis -- the law of blood -- held that a child's citizenship flowed from the parents' allegiance, regardless of place of birth. This principle was prevalent in continental Europe, and in England it was the basis for an exception to jus soli for children born there to foreign ambassadors.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bravosierra; cruz; naturalborncitizen; nbc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-144 next last

1 posted on 01/11/2016 8:19:23 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
However odious it seems today, a child born of a woman whose citizenship was different from her husband's -- much rarer then than today -- could not be a "natural born Citizen" of the mother's country. That idea wasn’t even considered until 1844 in Victorian England.
2 posted on 01/11/2016 8:20:55 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

The experts are coming out of the woodwork now, as opposed to crickets in 2008. Disgusting.


3 posted on 01/11/2016 8:22:45 AM PST by Genoa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Bull. The first Congress was very clear that someone who was a citizen by means of birth was a natural-born citizen. Immigration and Nationality Act of 1790. That should put to rest any question of what “Natural-born” meant to our founding fathers.


4 posted on 01/11/2016 8:23:22 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Poor George Washington. His mother wasn’t a US citizen when he was born.


5 posted on 01/11/2016 8:23:48 AM PST by Idaho_Cowboy (Ride for the Brand. Joshua 24:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Idaho_Cowboy

Yeah, but he got grandfathered in per the citizenship clause, as did the other seven of the first presidents.


6 posted on 01/11/2016 8:26:08 AM PST by Yashcheritsiy (What good is a constitution if you don't have a country to go with it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Idaho_Cowboy
Poor George Washington. His mother wasn’t a US citizen when he was born

Read the constitution: all the founding fathers, and all those who were citizens at the time of the constitution, are automatically grandfathered in as "natural born citizens." That clause ceases for anyone born thereafter.

7 posted on 01/11/2016 8:26:41 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Genoa

[The experts are coming out of the woodwork now, as opposed to crickets in 2008. Disgusting.]

Yes, and I remember not too long ago the same people complaining about the questioning Cruz is getting on this insisting that our candidates be vetted.

Don’t bitch if it’s YOUR candidate that’s being vetted. It’s what you asked for!!!


8 posted on 01/11/2016 8:26:55 AM PST by ObozoMustGo2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Interestingly, I saw a post by Publius Hulday from a while back that covered this issue. It’s referred to as “coverture,” and yes, it was in operation in the 1790s, though not the 1970s when Cruz was born.


9 posted on 01/11/2016 8:27:28 AM PST by Yashcheritsiy (What good is a constitution if you don't have a country to go with it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Idaho_Cowboy; Greetings_Puny_Humans
Poor George Washington. His mother wasn’t a US citizen when he was born.

Thats a logical KO in the first round. In the first ten seconds, even.

But GPH doesn't deal in logic, unfortunately.

10 posted on 01/11/2016 8:28:11 AM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Fordham Law Prof: Ted Cruz Not ‘Natural Born’ Under ‘Originalist’ View of Constitution

____________________________________________________

I disagree. Ted is a NBC. But the prof is right; The definition now of what a Natural Born Citizen is vastly different (possibly opposite of) what the Framers intended.


11 posted on 01/11/2016 8:29:25 AM PST by Responsibility2nd (Is Ted Cruz a US citizen? Yeah? Then Shut Up and Sit Down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus
Bull. The first Congress was very clear that someone who was a citizen by means of birth was a natural-born citizen. Immigration and Nationality Act of 1790.

Whether congress understood NBC according to the Law of Nations or English Common Law, in either case, Cruz wouldn't qualify. Under ECW, citizenship does not derive from the mother, but through the father. Under the law of nations, Cruz is disqualified because he was not born in the US to two citizen parents.

By the way, the 1790 act was amended and its "natural born" language specifically removed, probably due to Congress realizing that the British were using it to justify impressment. The founders did not want people upon whom dual claims of citizenship can be made.

12 posted on 01/11/2016 8:29:27 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Opening a can of worms.

Liberal courts that would not give 2 seconds to the Obama birth certificate will suddenly find Cruz’ situation REEEEEAL interesting.

If he wins we could be looking at overtime for the Obama Administration.


13 posted on 01/11/2016 8:29:39 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

If you liked his inane comment, I bet you loved my retort.


14 posted on 01/11/2016 8:30:52 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Ha ha. How quaint using the law to figure out what the law says. Don’t you know that’s why we have leftist activists.


15 posted on 01/11/2016 8:30:54 AM PST by Idaho_Cowboy (Ride for the Brand. Joshua 24:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

Exactly. Saint Ted doesn’t get a super-duper special out from being vetted, just because they like him.

If he can’t stand the heat, then he needs to get out of the kitchen.


16 posted on 01/11/2016 8:30:54 AM PST by Yashcheritsiy (What good is a constitution if you don't have a country to go with it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

I think you’re a putz.


17 posted on 01/11/2016 8:31:37 AM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Everybody who I make a fool of tends to feel that way.


18 posted on 01/11/2016 8:32:27 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Genoa

Not true. I was part of those opposing Obama based on his background. He was naturalized as a U.S.citizen in 1983; formerly he was an Indonesian citizen.

See: the blog of Leo Donofrio, which began in December 2008 and ended March 2012. His arguments for a strict understanding of the Article II eligibility requirement for Natural born citizenship is amazing. I strongly suggest you read all four years worth of information. All of it is eye opening. Note: anyone who challenged Obamas claims received death threats; Cruz has not gotten to that point.

https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2008/12/


19 posted on 01/11/2016 8:33:11 AM PST by SatinDoll (A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN IS BORN IN THE USA OF TWO USA CITIZENS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Under the current theory that says Ted is a Natural Born Citizen, the Royal Princes and Princesses of Jordan are also Natural Born Citizens. Their mother was born a US Citizen.

Do we really need to take a chance on another first term Senator who really, really wants to be President? Just asking.


20 posted on 01/11/2016 8:33:42 AM PST by SubMareener (Save us from Quarterly Freepathons! Become a MONTHLY DONOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-144 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson