Posted on 01/09/2016 7:58:16 PM PST by Joachim
Excellent job taking apart this article.
My view is the MSM /Uniparty are taking the opportunity to use Cruz to redefine NBC as ‘U.S. citizen at birth.’
They are doing this because they know a President Trump is likely going to expose Obama’s foreign birth. They want to cover to say, “Didn’t matter. He was still born to a U.S. citizen even if overseas...”
They also want to set up a Hispanic candidate, then Arab for the future.
Mrs. Cruz was kidnapped?
Joachim, I applaud your efforts, but I don’t think anyone is going to answer this question. I’ve lost count of how many times it’s been asked & ignored or obfuscated.
What this highlights is Cruz’s supporters’ claim that he is a ‘constitutionalist conservative’. He’s definitely not in favor of the Constitution as it was originally enacted. BIIIIG red flag right there.
Did Cruz undergo a naturalization ceremony in order to become a citizen? No. Therefore he is a natural born citizen. The founders didn’t define “natural born citizen” because they wished to allow Congress to define what natural born meant by virtue of the laws it created.
Text from the U.S. Naturalization Law of 1790:
SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, that the children of persons duly naturalized, dwelling within the United States, and being under the age of twenty-one years, at the time of such naturalization, and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident of the United States: Provided also, That no person heretofore proscribed by any state, or who has been legally convicted of having joined the army of Great Britain during the late war, shall be admitted a citizen as foresaid, without the consent of the legislature of the state, in which such person was proscribed.
Citizen and ‘natural born citizen’ aren’t the same.
***
Yes, Cruz is a
citizen
of the United States, but he is not a
natural born citizen
because he
was neither born “within the jurisdiction of the U
nited States†nor “of parents [plural!]
not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty.†R
afael Edward “Ted†Cruz was born in
Calgary, Canada, and his father was a citizen of Cu
ba at the moment of his birth. By no
stretch of the imagination can one claim Cruz was b
orn on U.S. soil
and
to
two
U.S.
citizen parents. In fact, Cruz was born with dual c
itizenship: U.S. and Canadian. (Some
might even argue that he was also born with Cuban c
itizenship.)
In the 1885 U.S. Supreme Court case
Minor v. Happersett
, Chief Justice Morrison Waite
wrote, “The Constitution does not, in words, say wh
o shall be natural-born citizens.
Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At
common-law, with the nomenclature
of which the framers of the Constitution were famil
iar, it was never doubted that all
children born in a country
of parents who were its citizens
[italics added] became
themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These
were natives, or natural-born citizens, as
distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some autho
rities go further and include as
citizens children born within the jurisdiction with
out reference to the citizenship of their
parents. As to this class there have been doubts, b
ut never as to the first.†That is, there
was agreement by all legal scholars in 1885 that th
e term natural born citizen meant
“born in the United States to two U.S.-citizen pare
nts.†(A minority argued that the
citizenship of the parents was not material but, wi
thout justification, Obama supporters—
and now Cruz supporters—accept the less common interpretation.)
http://thecompleteobamatimeline.com/uploads/3/5/7/4/3574872/whytedcruzis_notanaturalborncitizen.pdf
Y’all are nuts. Period.
I've been studying this in more depth today, and my understanding at this point is that the law governing the Cruz situation at his birth was the Naturalization Act of 1952.
That Act required that a child born to an American outside the country would, at the attainment of 18 years of age, be required to swear a loyalty oath to the United States.
This requirement as removed by the 1978 Naturalization Act, before Cruz reached the age of 18.
The point being that the governing law in the case of Cruz has always been our laws concerning naturalization.
Obummer cannot set a precedent for “native born” being able to become President in my opinion, because Obummer’s whole “reign” is fraudulent/criminal (as is his whole history, and I am waiting for the day he is exposed). But if Ted Cruz,”native born”, becomes President with no pre election fraud involved in the process, it will set a dangerous precedent for the future. Much as I like the man and his message and think he would make a good President, Cruz knows the Constitution inside out and should not let his personal ambition supersede the good of the country.
If the female met the requirements in the current statute (below), the child does indeed have birthright citizenship (which is the same as natural born).
"A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen, is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.) The U.S. citizen parent must be the genetic or the gestational parent and the legal parent of the child under local law at the time and place of the child's birth to transmit U.S. citizenship."
Yes, why wouldn’t they be? There are tens of millions of disgusting, deplorable “natural born citizens” in this country right now who are eligible for the presidency. If such a person comes back here, waits 14 years, and turns 35, he or she is free to seek the presidency - just like every Klansman, neo-Nazi, and militant Black Panther who meets the same criteria. If we the people elect them, that’s on us.
I’m continuing to grapple with these questions, and have been doing quite a bit of further study of the matter.
I’ve learned enough to know for sure that there are vast periods of American history in which someone born in Cruz’s exact circumstances would NOT have qualified as a citizen at birth, and therefore could not, under any rubric, be considered as a “natural born citizen.”
When the naturalization laws have been changed by Congress, has that somehow amended the Constitution or something?
Article 11 Section 1
Article II, Section 1: 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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
So Cruz is eligible to be President!!!
Funny, I just went through the entire act, and it does not contain any such requirement.
When you have Chuck E Schumer out front telling illegal aliens to come on in and WELCOME - our jackpot prize for you could be POTUS, what more can be said? Its crackerjack prizes found in a cardboard box. WTP continue to be left in the dark; Cruz and many others must get this in front of the courts There are those that deserve the votes and need the votes who will never see the votes. True Americans once voted their conscience. Today’s Americans, they are an entirely different breed of America and this might make no difference to them. Others take our Constitution seriously and DO NOT wish to unknowingly damage it. And just because the dark won in was deviously elected is no case that we should do the same devil’s work. Unlike the rats, we would rather play a FAIR game...even though many of us know this is no game, but something greater than.
I believe you are correct. Obama should be residing at Ft. Leavenworth, not the Whitehouse. Under a Trump administration that might just happen.
Right along my train of thought. Anything to eliminate someone who just might be a patriot!
Issues like this are decided in a courtroom not in an internet forum.
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.