If you still have doubts, be sure to read the red text in the margins before expressing them.
Posted on 01/30/2016 6:07:38 PM PST by kathsua
Rubio is eligible because he was born here. Leave Rubio out of this debate.
_________________________________________________________
By applying your logic tree..every mexican mom that swam the river yesterday and gives birth in Laredo tomorrow morning is potentially giving birth to a future president..is that what you are saying?
Stay tuned..you are about to get educated on the Constitutional requirements to assume the office of POTUS and VPOTUS..
You can search forever and come up empty. There isn't one.
Here's the relevant statutory definition of naturalization:
8 US Code 1101 - Definitions
(23) The term "naturalization" means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.
notes: 'after birth,' not at birth, and 'by any means whatsoever' including both individual naturalization and collective naturalization - both of which only concern persons already living, i.e. after birth.
It reads like Vattell, but not like the Constitution.
Peace,
SR
If you truly call yourself a true conservative....then you cant possibly let this one go. The United States President is an extremely important and most powerful and revered leadership position. That is why the founders made it harder to obtain than any other leadership position. Just because someone else fraudulently gamed the system last time. Doesn’t mean we should just continue to do the same thing. Cruz is betting that everyone will give him a pass because of Obama.
This in my opinion is called deviant behavior at best. Fraudulent behavior at worst. Even though Cruz would do a good job as President, he should respect the rules of the founders. Especially when he calls himself a constitutional conservative!
Actually, those are all USSC rulings. Cruz was not born in the US and derives his citizenship from an act of congress. He is naturalized, not NBC, and he knows it or at least he should. If you think a guy that was a citizen of another country until he was 43 and running for president is a qualified NBC than I guess NBC just does not mean that much to you. He also claims he did not know he was a citizen of Canada at 43 until the Dallas Morning News pointed it out. How is that for brilliant lawyering?
Apparently he told school chums about it, so he knew.
No, SCOTUS wil almost certainly never address the issue, but will let the qualifications for office be handled by the political apparatus, under the “political question” doctrine. I would be truly surprised to see them ever take this up. As I’ve said elsewhere, we’re wasting time on this. Cruz is not the person the founders were trying to block from rising to be Commander in Chief. They were worried about real threats, down-to-the-bone monarchists like Fredrick, Duke of York, or Prince Henry, coming over here, getting naturalized, winning the presidency, and pushing us back under a monarchy. If folks want to go beyond what the Constitution presently says, they need to amend it. I’m all for that. But I seriously doubt the Vattell language will make the final draft of any amendment proposed during an Article 5 convention.
Peace,
SR
A child who is born outside of the US to American parents receives a birth certificate from the State Department “Certificate of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America.”
My son has one. He is as fully American as his older brother who was born in Texas.
You are confusing Citizen and Natural Born Citizen. They are NOT the same thing.
A tree is a plant but not all plants are trees.
The Law of Nations published in 1758 by E. Vattel was the reference for “natural born citizen.”
George Washington, Chair of the constitution Committee received a letter from John Jay, who was to become the first Chief justice of the Supreme Court, suggesting the wording “natural born citizen.” There is a definite difference between a natural born citizen who CANNOT BE anything other than American, and a citizen who can be some other nationality by reason of parentage or place of birth.
Maybe. The statement I read from him about it said he did not know, which I find hard to believe. I am not a lawyer but would like to believe I know my citizenship status.
“When did he go through the naturalization process?”
The right to acquire naturalized U.S. citizenship vested at birth and is perfected after birth by compliance with the statutory requirements. This is described in the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 and administered in the U.S. State Department Foreign Affairs Manual.
“Wasn’t Obama a foreign exchange student? Did anyone ever review his college transcript.”
John McCain, the RNC, Barack Hussein Obama, and the DNC conspired under the table to suppress the fact both candidates were not natural born citizens and were ineligible to be POTUS candidates.
If there were not a difference, WHY did the Framers specifically use “Natural Born Citizen” for president and vice president, when ALL OTHER references in the constitution are simply CITIZEN?Why bother if there were not a difference?
Read Vattel,Law of Nations and see the wording. Just google it! Both parents Citizens and born on the soil.
How about- when he declared that he was giving up his Canadian citizenship- for $200 Alex?
Overview
This application is for an adult Canadian citizen who wishes to renounce his or her Canadian citizenship. To renounce your Canadian citizenship you must prove you are a Canadian citizen. You must also prove that you are, or will become a citizen of a country other than Canada, if this application to renounce is approved.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/renounce-how.asp
The Form FS-240 is not a birth certificate, such as is issued by a government-authorized bureau or office of vital statistics, because consular officers are not authorized to assume a foreign local or state vital statistics function.
He is a constitutional conservative. I studied ConLaw for two semesters in law school, made law review, got my Illinois law license, and have litigated ballot access matters in Cook County, and I am persuaded that Cruz has a strong case for eligibility to run for President. The Constitution uses a term that is capable of more than one interpretation, depending on one’s view of the history of the document and the men that crafted it, their resources, their influences, etc. Cruz is doubtless one of those who believes, as I do, that the British common law was a central source of the constitutional language, that the founders did not draw as sharp a line between that common law and statutory refinements to it, and that the specific citizenship criteria of Vattell is nowhere written into the constitution and is therefore, at a minimum, debatable. That is a fair position. There are several cases that gum around the edges but none produces a brightline rule that will infallibly guide in the case of presidential eligibility. Under these adverse conditions, it is as right and constitutional for Cruz to assert his eligibility as it is for anyone else who might have a reasonable claim to NBC status.
Peace,
SR
If you still have doubts, be sure to read the red text in the margins before expressing them.
The hypocrisy is just so staggering......
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.