Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cruz’s Birthplace Debated: Here’s Where Most US Presidents Were Born
livescience.com ^ | January 15, 2016 12:00pm ET | Tia Ghose, Senior Writer

Posted on 02/05/2016 2:59:26 AM PST by RC one

Map shows home towns of U.S. presidents. Credit: by Karl Tate, Infographics artist

It's no surprise that all 44 presidents were born on U.S. soil: The requirement for a president to be a "natural born citizen" is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The current debate about what that means stems from the fact that there's no document trail to reveal what, exactly, the Constitution writers meant by that statement.

Whatever your opinion may be, it is true that all of the presidents to date have been born in one of the 50 U.S. states. Live Science took a look at where the presidents were born. While the tally may have a lot to do with chance, the overall trends do reflect changes in the population, politics and attitudes of Americans over the years. [Map: See Where All the U.S. Presidents Were Born]

(Excerpt) Read more at livescience.com ...


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: cruz; naturalborncitizen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-163 next last
To: RC one

Even the losing major party candidates going back to the 1st presidential election were all born in the United States. The only asterisk would be John McCain born in the U.S. Panama Canal Zone.


41 posted on 02/05/2016 4:09:35 AM PST by r_barton (We the People of the United States...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MD Expat in PA

My statement is NOT ridiculous. Yes, my father was stationed in Germany. I was born in a German hospital. I do not have a born in the USA birth certificate. My parents are the only people that could give me natural born citizenship. They did NOT.


42 posted on 02/05/2016 4:11:55 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Seems Rubio’s birth should be of far more concern as Cruz had an American mother but Rubio is an anchor baby. If elected he would set precedent that all anchor babies can run for president. I have issues with many things about Cruz but place of birth is not one. Anchor babies I do have serious concern about.


43 posted on 02/05/2016 4:11:58 AM PST by nclaurel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RAWGUY

Those births were prior to independence. At the time, the people of the colonies were British subjects.


44 posted on 02/05/2016 4:14:08 AM PST by Flavious_Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: nclaurel

Either we are a Constitutional Republic or we are NOT. It should not be decided by ones love and devotion to any one person. Crazy thing, seems I, not natural born, have more loyalty to the Constitution, than those who are natural born.


45 posted on 02/05/2016 4:16:20 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RAWGUY

Why are we listing men like Washington. If we had to wait for a leader to be born on US soil at the time we became a sovereign nation, we would have had no president for at least the first 35 years. There was no sovereign US to born in when founding fathers were born.


46 posted on 02/05/2016 4:23:27 AM PST by nclaurel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: RC one

Neither Cruz nor Rubio is a natural born citizen!
A natural born citizen is one born on US soil to 2 US citizen parentS (contrary to what Cruz said, the parents do not have to be born in USA - they can be naturalized US citizens or nbc.)


47 posted on 02/05/2016 4:25:09 AM PST by chrisnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RC one

Born here of citizen parents.
One is NATURALLY a US citizen when one cannot possibly be anything else.
Natural born citizen.


48 posted on 02/05/2016 4:29:50 AM PST by Lurkinanloomin (Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
My statement is NOT ridiculous. Yes, my father was stationed in Germany. I was born in a German hospital. I do not have a born in the USA birth certificate. My parents are the only people that could give me natural born citizenship. They did NOT.

So your father who was serving his country in the military somehow cheated you out of your NBC because he was serving his country? Nice. Perhaps you should sue your father and mother for being such lousy parents /s

49 posted on 02/05/2016 4:30:13 AM PST by MD Expat in PA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: dinodino

Arthur destroyed the evidence before he died, we’ll never know for sure.


50 posted on 02/05/2016 4:31:02 AM PST by Lurkinanloomin (Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj
I think there's an awful lot of case law that says otherwise, case law that says basically this:

All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England.

Justice Swayne, United States v. Rhodes, 1 Abbott, US 28 (Cir. Ct. Ky 1866)">

Or this:

The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, a natural-born citizen. It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth.

Justice Curtis in his dissenting opinion of the Dred Scott decision and speaking specifically of natural born citizens and article II, section I, clause 5

51 posted on 02/05/2016 4:32:22 AM PST by RC one ("...all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens" US v. WKA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Lurkinanloomin

I am inclined to agree with you; however, there’s a lot of case law that says otherwise.


52 posted on 02/05/2016 4:34:05 AM PST by RC one ("...all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens" US v. WKA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: nclaurel
You should familiarize yourself with the words of Article II, section I, clause 5.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;

the following passage may help you understand those words:

That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, A very respectable political writer makes the following pertinent remarks upon this subject. Prior to the adoption of the constitution, the people inhabiting the different states might be divided into two classes: natural born citizens, or those born within the state, and aliens, or such as were born out of it.

St. George Tucker, BLACKSTONE'S COMMENTARIES (1803)

53 posted on 02/05/2016 4:38:51 AM PST by RC one ("...all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens" US v. WKA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: r_barton

I think McCain was clearly born into full and unencumbered allegiance to the United States and nobody else. It is interesting that we have had three elections in a row where this has been an issue however and it seems as if the issue is becoming more of a pattern, a pattern of usurpation of our sovereignty.


54 posted on 02/05/2016 4:43:38 AM PST by RC one ("...all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens" US v. WKA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RC one; BushCountry
It isn’t common sense, it’s just obfuscation and/or ignorance.

You birthers may have a point about Cruz, though he has an american mother which I think makes him eligible...

I think it's a moot one because your main point seems to be a - loyalty - issue...

Being POTUS is about winning an election by the american people though a good but tortuous process.

You aren't going to tell me Cruz or Rubio has a loyalty problem...are you ?

Both love this country enough to put everything on the line...to attempt to turn this big sinking ship around...

I was born in the Bronx, but I'm not a Yankee fan...Does that mean I don't love baseball ?

So here's the $64,000 question....

It falls down to Cruz or Rubio verses Hillary / Sanders...

Do you hold your nose and sit home re-reading birther threads or are you going to help fix the country by voting for conservative nominee or let the criminal or Marxist win ?

55 posted on 02/05/2016 4:44:15 AM PST by Popman (Christ alone: My Cornerstone...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MD Expat in PA

It is what it is. Given my father laid on a hillside in the Korean war, shooting artillery shells, and was with the group that returned the colors in a New York City parade, cheating me never entered my mind. I was raised to know that I was blessed beyond my ability to imagine, to be an American citizen. All it meant to me was that I was not eligible to hold the office of president.

Seems to me the ‘natural born’ citizens of the United States would have more loyalty to their birthright. But hey, there is that story of Esau, who sold his birthright for a ‘red’ bowl of pottage. (lentils) Then God made sure he lost his blessing as well. Seems too many are willing to sell their birthright to some charismatic preacher type.


56 posted on 02/05/2016 4:46:12 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Popman
I think it's a moot one because your main point seems to be a - loyalty - issue...

No no no no no. It is a constitutional issue. Letting an openly foreign born candidate ascend to the office of POTUS opens the door for even further subversion of the rule later. For three elections in a row, we have had increasingly questionable candidates running for POTUS. Our constitution is CLEARLY being subverted and I WON'T BE PART OF IT.

57 posted on 02/05/2016 4:52:33 AM PST by RC one ("...all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens" US v. WKA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Popman

Unlike anything I have heard Cruz say, Rubio has promised legalization of illegals here then securing borders that is not loyalty. I support Trump but Cruz is not on a par with Rubio. Loyalty is putting this country first not the desires of foreigners who come here illegally.


58 posted on 02/05/2016 5:01:10 AM PST by nclaurel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: RC one
A difficult question exists in the common law as to the citizenship of a child of English parents, born abroad. The New York Court of Appeals has decided that such a person was a citizen on the ground that the duty of allegiance passed by descent, the child following the condition of the father, and that the question in this country is to be determined by the common law as it existed at the time of the adoption of the United States Constitution. [Ludlam v Ludlam, 26 N.Y. 356] Sir Francis Bacon, in the great case of the antenati already referred to [Calvin's Case], was a strong advocate of this opinion and accepted all its consequences. He said, " If a man shall look narrowly into this point he shall find a consequence that may seem at the first strange, but cannot well be avoided, which is, that divers families of English men and women plant themselves at Rouen or at Lisbon and have issue, and their descendants do intermarry among themselves without any intermixture of foreign blood, such descendants are naturalized to all generations, for every generation is still of liege parents and therefore naturalized, so as you may have whole tribes and lineages of English in foreign countries." [Hargrave's State Trials, 81] Sir Francis Bacon's deduction will not now readily be accepted as law. The opposing theory that persons born abroad of American parents are aliens, unless there is a naturalizing statute in their aid, is powerfully sustained by a distinguished jurist, the late Horace Binney. [2 Am. Law Reg. 193. "The Alien-igence of the United States] His proposition may be briefly summed up thus: birth here confers citizenship; birth abroad causes alienage. On this view the citizenship of the parents is of no consequence. Citizenship assumes a territorial character. The sole inquiry is who had the sovereignty over the territory where the child was born at the time of its birth?

Theodore Dwight, Edward Dwight, Commentaries on the law of persons and personal property, pg. 125 (1894)

59 posted on 02/05/2016 5:02:02 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RC one
No no no no no. It is a constitutional issue.

That is still a murky issue until the SCOTUS rules on it, if ever....Under US current law both are eligible...

That may not line up with your interpretation of who is eligible but it's where we are today..

Letting an openly foreign born candidate ascend to the office of POTUS opens the door for even further subversion of the rule later.

I find midly humorous you are worried about potential future candidates undermining/subversion the Constitution when we have two candidates (the Criminal or Marxist) who have zero regard for the Constitution...

Still thinking about my question in the previous post...?

60 posted on 02/05/2016 5:04:00 AM PST by Popman (Christ alone: My Cornerstone...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-163 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson