Posted on 01/10/2016 10:01:39 AM PST by raptor22
TED CRUZ NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
I call him Resident Obama
Since he obviously does not have a legitimate birth certificate (if he did, we would have seen it a million times by now instead of the faked pdf version), He can never Qualify to Congress that he meets the eligibility requirements as he is commanded to do in the Twentieth Amendment, Section 3 of the Constitution.
He has never been anything but a Usurper to the office of President no matter how hard the media and Congress, etc, try to paint him as a legal President. Thus there has not been a precedent set. Someone who commits murder and gets away with it does not make murder legal.
“Ted Cruz...took action to renounce Canadian citizenship”
Any particular reason why he waited all his life to do so?
“Ridicule, innuendo and lies are Trump’s m. o., because he can’t argue the issues, and he has the maturity level of a seventh grader.”
After attending a Trump rally, Mark Steyn wrote that Trump would be a formidable debater against Hillary. Do you perceive something about Trump that escapes Steyn?
So if AmericanThinker and Cruz supporters say he is a NBC, the Dems will not file a million lawsuits/challenges should Cruz become the nominee?
Cruz has changed positions as well. Need a list?
Who in authority says so?
This will bring down Obama as well. All hell will break loose. “Have an exit plan”
You’d have to ask him. It’s been reported that he didn’t realize he had it until then.
No matter how his and obama's supporters choose to define "natural born citizen", a significant number of Americans do NOT agree, and most of those will NEVER see someone who wasn't born in country to citizen parents as a natural born citizen.
Ted Cruz very likely inherited American citizenship from his mother IF she still had American citizenship to pass on to him when he was born, but we don't know that for certain.
Those are things Canadian and American law have to decide and likely have decided long ago.
However, Ted Cruz definitely inherited Canadian citizenship due to his birth in Canada.
And, he most likely inherited Canadian citizenship from his father.
However, like with his mother, it is still unclear what citizenship the elder Cruz had to pass on to Ted when Ted was born.
Naturally, common sense says that such confusion and legalities make Ted Cruz anything but a Natural Born Citizen of the United States of America.
No amount of name calling or pseudo-legal expert opinion claim it's so or misstating the 1790 Naturalization Act while ignoring the Act of 1795 that completely rescinded it, is going change the minds of people with that understanding. Ted is NOT eligible and cannot be eligible!
As such, in this role as "Ted Cruz for President" he is very divisive, while at the same time attempting to again fundamentally rewrite our nationalism by rewriting our very definition of what is a 100% legally and naturally American citizen and nothing else.
What else can that definition be and still be true to our history, our integrity and the intent of our Founding Fathers except that of a child born in country to citizen parents?
Praise you, Donald Trump, for giving voice to this issue and to those for whom it and the Constitution's intent and integrity are more important than either personality or politician of the moment.
This is an integrity test we're currently failing. Let's get it right and then finally make it right this next time!
**He did not know of that citizenship, but once he did, he renounced it.**
Also, the US doesn’t recognize dual citizenship with Canada, so I doubt it would have been a problem. May have been a problem if he had served in a foreign military and/or committed treason against the US.
Had Cruz been born in 1921 under the identical birth circumstances that he was born into in 1970, than he would not even have been a US citizen. The Cable Act, passed in 1922, allowed a US citizen woman, married to a foreign national and who gives birth in a foreign country, to transmit US citizenship onto the newborn child for the first time.
Article II, Section I clause 5, was ratified in 1791 with the rest of the constitution, long before the Cable Act.. Article I has not been modified by any subsequent amendment. Accordingly, the original intent and meaning of Article II stands absent any such constitutional amendment.
The purpose of Article II, Section I clause 5 was to prevent undue foreign influence on the office of the presidency, PARTICULARLY thru a father owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. The framers took their definition for NBC from Emmerich De Vattel’s Law of Nations, the 212th paragraph of which was quoted in its entirety in the 1814 Venus Merchantman SCOTUS decision. The Law of Nations is referred to in Article I of the constitution. That definition referred to an NBC as being born of two citizen parents and born on the soil of the nation. That definition was cited in the 1868 case of Minor vs Hapersett, and Wong Kim Ark vs US. De Vattel has been cited and accepted in dozens of SCOTUS and federal lower court rulings. The framers were patriarchs who believed that the citizenship of the children followed the citizenship of the father.
The authors of the 14th amendment, Senators Howard Jacob and Rep. Bingham also defined an NBC in similar terms.
Obama is the very embodiment and personification of the REASON that the framers put those protections into the constitution. By ignoring it, we have opened ourselves to the anti American and unconstitutional tyranny that Obama poses to our constitutional republic.
Ted Cruz is head and shoulders the best candidate in the race. He is a patriot who loves this country and its people. He is intellectually and philosophically superior to ANYONE else in the race. As much as I admire him, He CANNOT be considered a natural born citizen, as he is a citizen by statute. He was born with THREE countries (The US, Canada, and Cuba thru his father) having a legitimate claim on his allegiance from birth, whether he wanted it or not. I believe in the constitution and the rule of law, NOT in the cult of personality. We should not yield to the same dark impulses of expediency and delusion that gave us the tyrannical sociopathic usurper demagogue Obama.
It shows a lack of due diligence.
I'd say it's pretty near certain. Cruz had (probably still has) a US Passport, and that would not be issued to a non-citizen. I can't imaging Cruz or his family "gaming" things, fudging evidence or whatever, to get that credential.
Cruz has statute-based citizenship based un US law. Some argue that this is natural born citizenship, becuase there was no naturalization procedure. SCOTUS says this type of citizenship is naturalization because the citizenship depends on a statute.
It's up to Cruz to resolve the issue. No court is going to find he is naturalized.
Provided the citizen mother met the residency requirements stated in the statute. Cruz's mother did.
Just "nitpicking" your statement. It's a generally true statement with just that one additional condition.
which makes is seem that citizenship is automatic due to the mother being a citizen. This is false, the grant of citizenship is not automatic.
In order for citizenship to be granted to an individual born outside the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents the citizen parent must be one “who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States [] for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years” (Pub.L. 82-414 § 301(a)(7); 66 Stat. 236)
If the citizen parent does not meet the statutory requirements there is no grant of citizenship to the child.
Also, as pointed out by DMZFrank, prior to the Cable Act citizenship of foreign-born children was determined by the citizenship of the father.
The terms of Congressional grants change from time to time. Naturalization statutes can require any process or none, any retention requirements or none. Congressional grants are naturalization.
Ted Cruz ran for his seat in the United States Senate before he gave up his Canadian citizenship.
I'm not sure what to make of that, legally or otherwise.
To put this as politely as possible, when I don't know what to make of someone, I am not in a place of trust for that person.
> No court is going to find he is naturalized.
Persons who acquire citizenship via federal statute can lose their citizenship if they fail to fulfill statutory requirements (Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815). A citizen under the 14th Amendment can not have their citizenship revoked (Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253).
That which is granted can be taken away.
Congressional grants are naturalization.
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.