Posted on 08/30/2013 12:02:15 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
By Ilya Shapiro, Senior Fellow In Constitutional Sudies and Editor-In-Chief, Cato Supreme Court Review
As we head into a potential government shutdown over the funding of Obamacare, the iconoclastic junior senator from Texas — love him or hate him — continues to stride across the national stage. With his presidential aspirations as big as everything in his home state, by now many know what has never been a secret: Ted Cruz was born in Canada.
(Full disclosure: I’m Canadian myself, with a green card. Also, Cruz has been a friend since his days representing Texas before the Supreme Court.)
But does that mean that Cruz’s presidential ambitions are gummed up with maple syrup or stuck in snowdrifts altogether different from those plaguing the Iowa caucuses? Are the birthers now hoist on their own petards, having been unable to find any proof that President Obama was born outside the United States but forcing their comrade-in-boots to disqualify himself by releasing his Alberta birth certificate?
No, actually, and it’s not even that complicated; you just have to look up the right law. It boils down to whether Cruz is a “natural born citizen” of the United States, the only class of people constitutionally eligible for the presidency. (The Founding Fathers didn’t want their newly independent nation to be taken over by foreigners on the sly.)
What’s a “natural born citizen”? The Constitution doesn’t say, but the Framers’ understanding, combined with statutes enacted by the First Congress, indicate that the phrase means both birth abroad to American parents — in a manner regulated by federal law — and birth within the nation’s territory regardless of parental citizenship. The Supreme Court has confirmed that definition on multiple occasions in various contexts.
There’s no ideological debate here: Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe and former solicitor general Ted Olson — who were on opposite sides in Bush v. Gore among other cases — co-authored a memorandum in March 2008 detailing the above legal explanation in the context of John McCain’s eligibility. Recall that McCain — lately one of Cruz’s chief antagonists — was born to U.S. citizen parents serving on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone.
In other words, anyone who is a citizen at birth — as opposed to someone who becomes a citizen later (“naturalizes”) or who isn’t a citizen at all — can be president.
So the one remaining question is whether Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth. That’s an easy one. The Nationality Act of 1940 outlines which children become “nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.” In addition to those who are born in the United States or born outside the country to parents who were both citizens — or, interestingly, found in the United States without parents and no proof of birth elsewhere — citizenship goes to babies born to one American parent who has spent a certain number of years here.
That single-parent requirement has been amended several times, but under the law in effect between 1952 and 1986 — Cruz was born in 1970 — someone must have a citizen parent who resided in the United States for at least 10 years, including five after the age of 14, in order to be considered a natural-born citizen. Cruz’s mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware, lived most of her life in the United States, and gave birth to little Rafael Edward Cruz in her 30s. Q.E.D.
So why all the brouhaha about where Obama was born, given that there’s no dispute that his mother, Ann Dunham, was a citizen? Because his mother was 18 when she gave birth to the future president in 1961 and so couldn’t have met the 5-year-post-age-14 residency requirement. Had Obama been born a year later, it wouldn’t have mattered whether that birth took place in Hawaii, Kenya, Indonesia, or anywhere else. (For those born since 1986, by the way, the single citizen parent must have only resided here for five years, at least two of which must be after the age of 14.)
In short, it may be politically advantageous for Ted Cruz to renounce his Canadian citizenship before making a run at the White House, but his eligibility for that office shouldn’t be in doubt. As Tribe and Olson said about McCain — and could’ve said about Obama, or the Mexico-born George Romney, or the Arizona-territory-born Barry Goldwater — Cruz “is certainly not the hypothetical ‘foreigner’ who John Jay and George Washington were concerned might usurp the role of Commander in Chief.”
Who said there was an effective date? I believe at least two hard (nut) cases got zotted today and at least one thread that was full of nasty, lying, slanderous attacks on our conservative friends Levin and Cruz got pulled. No further definition of nasty, lying, slanderous attack is required. You can figure it out for yourself.
Your kids were born with a divided citizenship.
They are wholly one thing or parts of another.
So you’re saying Obama is too legit to quit?
So we are no longer birthers ....
“Who said there was an effective date?”
Well, actually, “If he decides to run” certainly implies one.
Nevermind. If I am found to be posting nasty, lying, slanderous attacks, then I certainly need to be zotted.
Thanks for the reply.
As of the second term, the birther stuff is mute.
http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/detail/address-by-senator-elect-ted-cruz-event-audiovideo
If you haven’t heard a speech by Cruz, listen to this one. Not a single note as he talks to a room full of lawyers. And he is funny at times. This man is real.
I am familiar with his style and demeanor.
He is to the point without being personal.
Stick to his guns and chips away.
He is quite affable even in situations where people take potshots at him.
There’s an older rule in effect: No attacks on freepers or our conservative friends, candidates or potential candidates. Mark Levin is a conservative friend and FReeper. Cruz is probably the most conservative friend we have currently in the senate and he was put there by the grassroots (including us) and he is a potential grassroots presidential candidate and we don’t intend on hosting a site that attempts to tear him down. I usually let a lot of this stuff slide, but after the beating we took in the last two presidential elections, I’m less likely to allow that to happen. If you guys want to go off and start your own anti-Cruz website, be my guest. I won’t try to stop you. Good luck.
bttt
Do you know natural law?
Our Founders did.
No it’s not mute. As a matter a fact it is going to get kicked into high gear with Arpaio’s Obama forged birth certificate and selective service evidence recently being turned over to Congressman Stockman who’s ready to investigate on Capitol Hill.
Thanks for the video.
Cruz rocks.
Nothing against Joe Arpio, but if anyone kicked this into higher gear it is Ted Cruz himself.
Does Cuba follow natural law?
I think not.
So for the record Jim, are you implying that no threads are to be made that questions Ted Cruz’s eligibility to be a candidate for president?
Yes he did! We’ve had more mainstream media stories on his citizenship in the past month that media stories on Obama’s citizenship his whole presidency.
I meant ‘than’. Doggone sticky keyboard!
If you wish to attack good conservatives, start your own damned website and have at it. You're not going to do it here. Good luck with that.
“There are people here now who are old enough to run, hate this country, who’s parents were never citizens and never wanted to be. But they were born just on American soil. Somehow I don’t think the founders considered them presidential timber.”
Yep. Second generation illegals, I call them. Speak Spanglish, little English, wave the Mexican flag around, yet, they can run for president. Matt’s book Domestic Enemies was about such a scenario whereby the Mexicans take over New Mexico. Without illegal voting and taxation without representation, read:welfare, the Democrats would get very few votes.
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.