“He is, in fact, eligible for the presidency.”
Actually Rubio is an anchor baby born in Miami and neither parent was a U.S. Citizen at the time. Maybe he is eligible and maybe he isn’t. It would depend on what a panel of judges in the Appeals Court Circuit decided. An evenly split Supreme probably wouldn’t be able to decide.
A few days ago, it was John Kasich using this fake ‘tea party’ to raise money.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2725197/posts?page=29#29
Today....it’s MARCO RUBIO.
Anchor Baby Marco Rubio running a Tea Party Donation Scam
http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/2016/02/anchor-baby-marco-rubio-running-tea.html
The SC wouldn’t be evenly split. It would probably be 8-0 saying Rubio (or Cruz) is eligible.
“Actually Rubio is an anchor baby born in Miami and neither parent was a U.S. Citizen at the time.”
His parents were legal residents which means he was a citizen at birth based on the 14th amendment.
Whether he was a natural born citizen or naturalized at birth depends on whether the founders intended “natural” to mean jus sanguinis (by blood) or jus solis (by land).
I think history indicates the founders’ general consensus was that citizenship is naturally conveyed by blood. But courts seemed to have favored the Blackstone / British common law argument, as opposed to the Vattel / natural law argument.
But if he is, then all anchor babies are.