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

Skip to comments.

Bad news for Ted Cruz: his eligibility for president is going to court
Vox ^ | 02/18/16 | Dara Lind and Jeff Stein

Posted on 02/19/2016 6:36:53 AM PST by Enlightened1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 321-337 next last
To: Cboldt

Name one!


81 posted on 02/19/2016 7:07:32 AM PST by G Larry (ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS impose SLAVE WAGES on LEGAL Immigrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
A Natural Born Citizen must be born of a father that was a citizen of the United States at the time of his birth. Location of the birth is irrelevant.

Zatso? Barack Husein Obama Senior was a British subject.

He never became a US citizen, indeed, he never even applied to be one.

He was a British subject as Kenya was part of the British Empire.

82 posted on 02/19/2016 7:07:37 AM PST by null and void (This is "They live", and most people would rather fight you than put on the glasses...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik

The universe is full of silly notions, but the courts have already made clear that they don’t care about this issue. Judges, especially the liberal ones, don’t think this clause applies anymore. Even strict original intent crowd believe that this clause is present in order to prevent a subject of the King of England becoming President. This issue is moot.


83 posted on 02/19/2016 7:08:09 AM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: freedomjusticeruleoflaw
Whether or not the constitution defines NBC doesn't matter for the Cruz case. The cosntitution does define "citizen," and puts them into a couple groups that are adequate to decide the Cruz case.

See 14th amendment and Art IV, Sec. 2

84 posted on 02/19/2016 7:08:13 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Everyone of you can crow, until all the frivolous suits gets thrown out of court! As a Cruz man however, I think the poster is funny. Misguided, but funny!
85 posted on 02/19/2016 7:08:15 AM PST by gbscott1954 (Why not a real Conservative?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I agree. I’d rather it be settled now.


86 posted on 02/19/2016 7:08:25 AM PST by fuzzylogic (welfare state = sharing consequences of poor moral choices among everybody)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
I do not believe Cruz fulfills the qualifications of the Constitution.

Nor do I, that being said, I think he'd be a good president.

Certainly better than the current occupier!

87 posted on 02/19/2016 7:08:57 AM PST by null and void (This is "They live", and most people would rather fight you than put on the glasses...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Durbin

[So he’s just petty and butthurt? Here I was thinking he was above all of that. Silly me.]

No, I would say he’s cunning and calculated.
He sees a better opportunity for a cabinet post in a Trump admin that a Cruz one.

Plus, payback’s a b**ch.


88 posted on 02/19/2016 7:09:05 AM PST by ObozoMustGo2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: crz
What does this tell us?

One side plays to win.

The other?

Not so much...

89 posted on 02/19/2016 7:10:00 AM PST by null and void (This is "They live", and most people would rather fight you than put on the glasses...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: okkev68
No candidate for president should have to revoke his citizenship to his native country as Cruz did in 2014.

It's ridiculous to say he didn't know for 40 years.

90 posted on 02/19/2016 7:10:31 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Frankly, the reason she doesn’t discuss Vattel is because Vattel is, ultimately, irrelevant to the discussion. I keep seeing people throw Vattel’s name around, but they miss the point that Vattel himself later said that the natural law definition of “natural born” can be, and is, overriden whenever a nation enacts some form of positive law (which would include, for purposes of this discussion, English common law) to that effect. Because the Framers intended the common law to be controlling for what an NBC is, Vattel’s “natural law” definition is nothing more than an historical curiosity.


91 posted on 02/19/2016 7:11:18 AM PST by Yashcheritsiy (You can't have a constitution without a country to go with it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: gbscott1954
Everyone of you can crow, until all the frivolous suits gets thrown out of court! As a Cruz man however, I think the poster is funny. Misguided, but funny!

Check my posting history. I think Cruz has cost himself by hiring Roe for dirty tricks in his campaign: it undercut his "responsible, clean, soft-spoken, gentlemanly" image: and once the seed of doubt has been sowed, since the conservatives have been lied to *so* often...

There should have been a way for Cruz, should he have wished to go that way, to have done it either in a "hands-off" manner; *OR*, to have fully owned it, saying, "it's payback time for...' (long list here beginning with Bork.)

But he didn't.

That being said, I will still work HARD for Cruz in the general should he secure the nomination.

92 posted on 02/19/2016 7:11:31 AM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Agreed! As I’ve been saying, Cruz would not have jumped into this race if he didn’t think he could clear this hurdle, and it isn’t that high of a hurdle.


93 posted on 02/19/2016 7:11:56 AM PST by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

This is about immigration and does not alter the qualifications for president. If it did, it would have said so.


94 posted on 02/19/2016 7:12:41 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Actually its not fuzzy. At the time the Constitution was written the second example was considered natural born based on English custom.


95 posted on 02/19/2016 7:12:43 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ditto, if anyone should be questioned it’s the smarmy used car salesman Rubio.


96 posted on 02/19/2016 7:13:21 AM PST by VTenigma (The Democratic party is the party of the mathematically challenged)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Yes, but the 14th in no way can redefine the original meaning of the phrase when it the Constitution was ratified, and of course Congress has no authority to arbitrarily assign a meaning either, even if the Supreme Court says they can. To “fix” this a simple amendment striking the language entirely is needed.


97 posted on 02/19/2016 7:14:39 AM PST by freedomjusticeruleoflaw (Western Civilization- whisper the words, and it will disappear. So let us talk now about rebirth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: JayGalt
are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

That is exactly what we were taught in school (many years ago but closer in time to the writing of the constitution than we are now.)

98 posted on 02/19/2016 7:14:52 AM PST by Abby4116
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

So, John McCain wasn’t eligible either (born in Panama)? I don’t see the Cruz disparagers here say anything about that.


99 posted on 02/19/2016 7:15:47 AM PST by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grania
I'd always assumed there was a process to authenticate eligibility.

Yup.

It would appear that there are TWO (2) fully signed and notarized versions of the DNC presidential certification that was sent out to the 50 states at the conclusion of the Democratic Convention in Colorado. One includes a ‘legally qualified’ statement, while the other version, sent out to the 50 states, omits it. This shouldn’t bode well for Nancy Pelosi, who signed both versions. Can you say, “misprision of treason?” Sourec here

100 posted on 02/19/2016 7:16:01 AM PST by null and void (This is "They live", and most people would rather fight you than put on the glasses...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 321-337 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