Posted on 02/10/2016 6:32:24 AM PST by smoothsailing
In terms of the debate about Presidential eligibility you have just demoted yourself back to the Kindergarten level of discourse. You have just pinned your argument on the opinions of some lawyers who flatly lied in those documents and tried to use their government resumes to say just trust them when they say their opinion is more important than the actual words in the statutory law, the case law, and simple common sense. Other legal scholars have excoriated those authors and their article for their falsity. Before I and other debaters waste even more of our time refuting this trash yet again, waste your won time attempting to confirm their false statements with actual quotations from the applicable statutes, case law, and natural law. Now, I have more important things to attend to IRL today.
Error in logic. Cruz is a citizen by birth, but that does not necessarily make him an NBC eligible to be President. The issue has never been litigated. It is not settled law.
I guess about the only thing we will both ever share a consensus is that Ted is a citizen. But from there on is where we differ. You claim he is not a naturalized citizen and yet needs clarification as to his being natural born.
That's the gist of it. We need the courts to weigh in on whether Cruz is a NBC or not. I would like to see it done sooner rather than later.
Since clarification still needs to be applied as far as many Americans are concerned, it leaves it up to citizens to determine his Constitutional qualifications. While it may indeed be in the nation's best interest, it is not in Ted's best interest. Which is why you will never see Ted initiate the seeking of such a ruling. If Ted had the nation's best interest at heart he would have not only denounced his Canadian citizenship in 2014, he would have sought out a ruling on his natural born status at that time as well.
Agree. I also fault the state election boards that have placed him on the primary ballots. It is their responsibility to determine his eligibility. Cruz's eligibility to be on the ballot has been challenged so far in NH, FL, MD, and VT. I am sure there will be more as the process moves along.
. Also unlike Reagan, he really would lose the general election. He doesn't have the appeal or charisma that Reagan had to pull voters from every demographic in sufficient numbers.On that we agree.
You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. There is a major difference of opinion among constitutional scholars on the definition of NBC and eligibility for the Presidency. You may fancy yourself as the final arbiter of the issue, but you are totally irrelevant to the discussion or the reality that currently exists.
Is Obama a NBC eligible to be President? I suspect you will say no. Yet we have Obama elected twice to the WH acting as the President and CIC. You can stomp your foot and get red in the face that he is ineligible, but your opinion is irrelevant. We now have the question of the eligibility of both Cruz and Rubio. They are running for President. That is the reality.
I am sure you did not read the 103 page research paper that goes into great detail on the issue. All of the legal citations and history are painstakingly laid out in great detail. Opinions are like a$$holes, everyone has one.
“Cruz and my daughter became citizens of the United States by birth, not naturalization.”
No they did not. If your daughter was born abroad and outside the jurisdiction of the United States, meaning without diplomatic immunity, she could only acquire U.S. citizenship by naturalization at birth or naturalization after birth. Recently it was made an illegal act for a U.S. citizen to depart or to enter the United States without a valid U.S. passport. Previously, we used to be able to cross the Canadian-U.S. border with our U.S. state driver’s license. The U.S. Immigration and Naturalizations Acts require a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA) Form FS-240, Certification of Report of Birth Form DS-1350, or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Certificate of Citizenship as the circumstances require to document the acquisition of U.S. citizenship by naturalization at birth and to obtain a U.S. passport.
“You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. There is a major difference of opinion among constitutional scholars on the definition of NBC and eligibility for the Presidency.”
You are only repeating the lies of Tribe, Olson, and the others in defiance of the quoted facts and the opinions of the legal scholars who refuted those people.
“You may fancy yourself as the final arbiter of the issue, but you are totally irrelevant to the discussion or the reality that currently exists.”
There you go again inventing yet another strawman argument and false logic. I have never claimed to be “the final arbiter of the issue,” and on the contrary urge every reader to investigate the actual legal authorities and sources to make their own independent judgments based on the actual evidence and not the opinions of lawyers and politicians who are actively working to subvert the laws and the Constitution for their own political and personal gain. I may explain the concepts that are involved to help readers to understand the subject matter, but it must always conform to the evidence found in the legal sources, common law traditions, and Natural Law as described in the legal dictionaries, the legal treatises, and other sources of legal and political authority known to the authors of the Constitution. It is regrettable that you choose not to acknowledge or respect the truth of that objective approach to the investigation of the eligibility debate.
“Is Obama a NBC eligible to be President? I suspect you will say no. Yet we have Obama elected twice to the WH acting as the President and CIC.”
Obama is neither the first nor the first to do so in the United States, because President Chester Arthur was also a British citizen who unlawfully served as POTUS with bad consequences for the United States that we are still experiencing at this time.
“You can stomp your foot and get red in the face that he is ineligible, but your opinion is irrelevant. We now have the question of the eligibility of both Cruz and Rubio. They are running for President. That is the reality.”
Again, you are engaging in another strawman argument to entertain yourself. There is no “ stomp your foot and get red in the face” antics involved. That is just another attempt to ridicule as an ad hominem attack. Still, if you insist upon aiding and abetting the gross contempt for the Constitution and the law, don’t be surprised if and when against all odds humorless people who kept their oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic have no sympathy for your bad choices when it comes time to punish the willful outlaws. The law is right there for you to read, understand, and obey. If you choose to treat it with contempt and ridicule while thinking you are safe in adopting what someone tells you to do and to think, you make yourself no better than the people who were complicit with such totalitarian governments as NAZI Germany, the Soviet Union, and so many other murderous regimes. The natural born citizen clause is not a triviality, and its abuse has already had very profound consequences as ineligible and unlawful Presidents have appointed justices to the U.S. Supreme court who were themselves appointed unlawfully and wreaked disastrous consequences upon our American society.
I am sure you did not read the 103 page research paper that goes into great detail on the issue. All of the legal citations and history are painstakingly laid out in great detail. Opinions are like a$$holes, everyone has one.
Now I know you are full of it. My daughter was born in Singapore while I was posted as a US diplomat in Jakarta. Both my wife and I are US citizens. I personally filed a Consular Report of Birth and received the documentation to bring my daughter back to Jakarta. After that, my daughter was added to my wife's diplomatic passport for travel back to the US. Eventually, my daughter was issued a US passport. She was never naturalized. She never received a certificate of naturalization. She is a US citizen by birth (jus sanguinis), not thru naturalization.
Whether she is a NBC is another matter. I believe she is but the courts have never litigated the issue.
Yes, there is disagreement among acknowledged constitutional scholars. They differ. Only the courts can resolve those differences.
It is regrettable that you choose not to acknowledge or respect the truth of that objective approach to the investigation of the eligibility debate.
I acknowledge the debate, but the debate hasn't been resolved. Only the courts can do that.
Obama is neither the first nor the first to do so in the United States, because President Chester Arthur was also a British citizen who unlawfully served as POTUS with bad consequences for the United States that we are still experiencing at this time.
His father was not a US citizen at the time. There is even some dispute that he was not born in the US, but rather Canada. I am very aware of all of this. We have gone over the issue of Obama's eligibility in great depth here on FR. I participated in those discussions.
Still, if you insist upon aiding and abetting the gross contempt for the Constitution and the law, don’t be surprised if and when against all odds humorless people who kept their oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic have no sympathy for your bad choices when it comes time to punish the willful outlaws.
As someone who has sworn to protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, as a naval officer and foreign service officer, I take that responsibility seriously, even risking my life to do so. I don't need any lectures from you when it comes to service and patriotism.
The law is right there for you to read, understand, and obey.
BS. The definition of NBC has never been litigated as it applies to eligibility for the Presidency. It needs to be decided in the courts.
you make yourself no better than the people who were complicit with such totalitarian governments as NAZI Germany, the Soviet Union, and so many other murderous regimes.
You are an a$$hole. I lived in a communist country for two years. I understand the difference between totalitarianism and a free republic.
“Now I know you are full of it. My daughter was born in Singapore while I was posted as a US diplomat in Jakarta. Both my wife and I are US citizens. I personally filed a Consular Report of Birth and received the documentation to bring my daughter back to Jakarta. After that, my daughter was added to my wife’s diplomatic passport for travel back to the US. Eventually, my daughter was issued a US passport. She was never naturalized. She never received a certificate of naturalization. She is a US citizen by birth (jus sanguinis), not thru naturalization.”
A child born abroad with one or with two U.S. citizen parents acquires U.S. citizenship only by naturalization at birth or naturalization after birth, unless the child is protected by diplomatic immunity, in which case the child is a natural born citizen of the United States. Whether the child is naturalized at birth, naturalized after birth, or natural born citizen of the U.S.; an entry document/s are required to cross the U.S. border into the United States such as the Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA), inclusion on a parent’s U.S. passport, and/or other accepted documents. If your daughter was born under the protection of diplomatic immunity, she was a natural born citizen and was not naturalized at birth. If your daughter was not born under the protection of diplomatic immunity, then she automatically acquired U.S. citizenship by naturalization at birth and no further documentation was required to evidence the naturalization than the Consular Report of a Birth Abroad (CRBA) and subsequent inclusion on a parent’s U.S. passport. A child born abroad with two U.S. citizen parents is not required to go through an immigration and naturalization procedure in order to become naturalized at birth.
“Whether she is a NBC is another matter. I believe she is but the courts have never litigated the issue.”
It all depends on whether or not your daughter was born under the protection of diplomatic immunity. If your wife had a U.S. diplomatic passport at the time of your daughter’s birth, it appears your daughter was born under diplomatic immunity and would therefore definitely be a natural born citizen of the U.S. and therefore eligible to lawfully serve as POTUS.
Ted Cruz, however, was supposedly qualified to acquire U.S. citizenship only by naturalization at birth, because we know his mother was definitely not a U.S. diplomat and his father was a foreign citizen when the birth took place in the foreign jurisdiction of Canada. According to the information I recently discovered, it may well be that Ted Cruz did not lawfully acquire any U.S. citizenship due to his father’s failure to naturalize in the time frame required by Section 320 of Public Law 414, U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952.
You are wrong. There is no such thing as naturalization at birth. You are either a citizen at birth or naturalized period.
It all depends on whether or not your daughter was born under the protection of diplomatic immunity. If your wife had a U.S. diplomatic passport at the time of your daughter’s birth, it appears your daughter was born under diplomatic immunity and would therefore definitely be a natural born citizen of the U.S. and therefore eligible to lawfully serve as POTUS.
First it has nothing to do with diplomatic immunity. Yes, my wife and I had diplomatic passports. I was accredited to Indonesia not Signapore. My daughter had the option of claiming Singaporean citizenship up to 18.
It wouldn't matter if we had regular passports or diplomatic passports. You handle births like mine the same way diplomat or not. I had a consular commission. You don't know what you are talking about.
There is no such thing as naturalization at birth.
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.