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

To: Kaslin

From the article:

There followed a lengthy story in which the Reaganesque Rubio, elected in 2009 from Florida and already touted as a 2012 vice presidential contender, fell back on an explanation that he’d been relying on family lore while solidifying his identity with Cuban-American voters.

How can he be a vice presidential contender when he is not a Natural Born Citizen as required by the Constitution? His parents were NOT citizens when he was born.


7 posted on 10/28/2011 7:06:37 PM PDT by Crazy ole coot (Mr. obama (the squatter in the Whitehouse) is NOT a Natural Born Citizen!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Crazy ole coot

Marco Rubio was born here. In the good ole USA. He is a US citizen just like the anchor babies.


10 posted on 10/28/2011 7:08:52 PM PDT by Palladin (Newt/Cain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Crazy ole coot
His parents were NOT citizens when he was born.

Obama's father was on a student visa, and never even applied for US citizenship. Obama's mother was underage when Barry was born. If Obama can sit in the White House, I see no problem with Rubio. At least we know for sure Rubio was born on American soil.
18 posted on 10/28/2011 7:42:06 PM PDT by federal__reserve (Perry is a good man but his one on one debates with Obama keeps me awake at nights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Crazy ole coot
It is you who does not understand the constitution. Here is what it says about the 14th Amendment

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.

Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the Dred Scott v. Sandford ruling by the Supreme Court (1857) that held that blacks could not be citizens of the United States.[1]

Background

Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 1 formally defines citizenship and protects a person's civil and political rights from being abridged or denied by any state. This represented the overruling of the Dred Scott decision's ruling that black people were not, and could not become, citizens of the United States or enjoy any of the privileges and immunities of citizenship.[2] The Civil Rights Act of 1866 had already granted U.S. citizenship to all persons born in the United States, as long as those persons were not subject to a foreign power; the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment added this principle into the Constitution to prevent the Supreme Court from ruling the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to be unconstitutional for lack of congressional authority to enact such a law and to prevent a future Congress from altering it by a mere majority vote.

This section was also in response to the Black Codes that southern states had passed in the wake of the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery in the United States.[3] The Black Codes attempted to return former slaves to something like their former condition by, among other things, restricting their movement, forcing them to enter into year-long labor contracts, prohibiting them from owning firearms, and by preventing them from suing or testifying in court.[4]

Finally, this section was in response to violence against black people within the southern states. A Joint Committee on Reconstruction found that only a Constitutional amendment could protect black people's rights and welfare within those states.[5]

Citizenship Clause

There are varying interpretations of the original intent of Congress, based on statements made during the congressional debate over the amendment.[6][7] During the original debate over the amendment Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan—the author of the Citizenship Clause[8]—described the clause as having the same content, despite different wording, as the earlier Civil Rights Act of 1866, namely, that it excludes Native Americans who maintain their tribal ties and "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers."[9] According to historian Glenn W. LaFantasie of Western Kentucky University, "A good number of his fellow senators supported his view of the citizenship clause."[8] Others also agreed that the children of ambassadors and foreign ministers were to be excluded.[10][11] However, concerning children born in the United States to parents who are not U.S. citizens (and not foreign diplomats), three Senators, including Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lyman Trumbull, the author of the Civil Rights Act, as well as President Andrew Johnson, asserted that both the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment would confer citizenship on them at birth, and no Senator offered a contrary opinion.[12][13][14]

To make it more clear. Children born to foreigners that are Ambassadors and ministers of their countries are citizens of their countries.

On the other hand children born to immigrants, who are not yet citizen and are not Diplomats and ministers of their countries are automatically US Citizen. Marco Rubio's parents were private citizen of Cuba and not diplomats or ministers

43 posted on 10/29/2011 5:00:43 AM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

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