Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: OneWingedShark
I view with great suspicion these things that try to get things done contrary to constitutional restrictions,

That's just is OneWingedShark, there ARE NO CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRIcTIONS.

Nothing in the Constitution, it's amendments, US Law, or SCOTUS ruling unambiguously defines "Natural Born" as requiring 2 US Citizens at birth or requiring birth to take place in the US.

Until there is something that does unambiguously define those issues as going against Cruz, HE IS eligible to be POTUS.
16 posted on 03/12/2015 1:03:24 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: SoConPubbie

> Nothing in the Constitution, it’s amendments, US Law, or SCOTUS ruling unambiguously defines “Natural Born” as requiring 2 US Citizens at birth or requiring birth to take place in the US. Until there is something that does unambiguously define those issues as going against Cruz, HE IS eligible to be POTUS.

The Supreme Court has unambiguously stated:

“A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory, or by authority of congress, exercised either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens by proceedings in the judicial tribunals, as in the ordinary provisions of the naturalization acts.” – U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark


21 posted on 03/12/2015 1:21:48 PM PDT by Ray76 (Obama says, "Unlike my mum, Ruth has all the documents needed to prove who Mark's father was.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: SoConPubbie
That's just is OneWingedShark, there ARE NO CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRIcTIONS.

Really?

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.
Sounds like restrictions to me.

Nothing in the Constitution, it's amendments, US Law, or SCOTUS ruling unambiguously defines "Natural Born" as requiring 2 US Citizens at birth or requiring birth to take place in the US.

This is true — but if you appeal to a congressional act to claim that his mother could transmit citizenship to him, you are implicitly relying on a [normal] congressional act; but such an act cannot alter the Constitution, and as congress is only given the power to define a uniform rule of naturalization to rely upon this is to implicitly assert that he is a naturalized citizen which is contrary to the claim that he is natural born. (i.e. it is self contradictory.)

Until there is something that does unambiguously define those issues as going against Cruz, HE IS eligible to be POTUS.

Oh? And why shouldn't I take it to be the other way? That until there's something that unambiguously says otherwise that anyone who is not born in the US to two citizen parents is not a Natural Born Citizen? — I would much rather start with the most stringent interpretation than start with a loose one ant try to 'tighten' it up, especially considering how precedence has essentially been elevated to a superior position over constitutionality.

27 posted on 03/12/2015 1:31:39 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: SoConPubbie
Until there is something that does unambiguously define those issues as going against Cruz, HE IS eligible to be POTUS.

I don't think that's exactly right.

Until that unambiguous definition is provided, there will be some ambiguity about whether he is eligible, as indeed there has been for Obama.

42 posted on 03/12/2015 1:58:01 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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