Posted on 01/20/2016 2:21:12 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
LOL *BUMP*
Would you like to define hijack in this sense?
Would you then like to speak to your reason for Post 7?
What should I have done when you are misquoting/misinterpreting the statutes on the thread? I learn a lot by reading people’s comments and I try and provide info and references to pay it forward.
I don't know if that's true or not because I'm not familiar with Canadian law. He was, however, a "national and citizen of the United States at birth," which, until I see a convincing argument otherwise, is the same as a NBC.
He is not naturalized, which in US law is defined as "the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth."
Details posted here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3384445/posts?page=34#34
If as you claim the 1790 Act gives Cruz ‘eligibility’, then why did not Cruz use that Act when specifically asked about his eligibility? No act by a court or Congress can bestow upon on any one, the Constitutional requirement to hold the office of president... The Constitution does not say those 1790 Act is a requirement... Are eligible to hold the office of president.
The Constitutional requirement was not changed...it says one must be ‘natural born’. Cruz is not ‘natural born, and he knows it!
If as you claim the 1790 Act gives Cruz eligibility, then why did not Cruz use that Act when specifically asked about his eligibility?
Good question. And the answer is: ?
Please see post 95, Cruz or his mother needed to apply for citizenship which would be granted if he fit the definitions in the statute. He is a citizen by statute not by birth.
I have yet to hear Cruz say I am ‘natural born’. And when he was asked about his eligibility he went on a long winded tangent about who else might have eligibility questions... But when he questioned trump’s mother might cause trump issues, I knew he knows he is not ‘natural born’. He expects to be exempted from the Constitutional requirements... Truth is the first causality of his campaign...Constitution be damned.
I have yet to hear Cruz say I am natural born. And when he was asked about his eligibility he went on a long winded tangent about who else might have eligibility questions... But when he questioned trumps mother might cause trump issues, I knew he knows he is not natural born. He expects to be exempted from the Constitutional requirements... Truth is the first causality of his campaign...Constitution be damned.
I don’t see it that way. Cruz needed to satisfy the statute first. A Canadian child born in Canada would have evoked sympathies from American’s that would not make him American. He could have been refused citizenship if his mother didn’t have residence requirements, if she renounced her citizenship, if she weren’t able to produce the required papers the citizenship would not have been awarded.
That inescapable fact that shows he was not a natural born citizen but was a citizen by statute under the designation of the Consulate or United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
I don’t like being put in the position of harping on the issue. The Constitution and the requisite Amendments and legal decisions are likewise open to all to read. By providing the links I seek to give others the avenue to read and satisfy themselves.
Ted Cruz was entitled to become an American citizen when he was born if he fulfilled the statutes to the satisfaction of the State Dept/Consulate. That is not the same as automatic birthright citizenship and no amount of wishing will make it so. In my opinion its a shame but there are many ways he can exert his efforts on behalf of America without trying to evade the constitutional requirements for the office of the Presidency.
I understand your position, but disagree with it, which is why I used the hypotheticals I did.
You are not harping. You are making an understandable case on a potentially complicated matter. It gets more complicated when Common Law and Natural Law are brought in, as even Natural Law requires a judicial framework (e.g. laws defining the boundaries and jurisdiction of a nation). Also, while the terms “citizen” and “subject” are analogous, they are certainly NOT identical.
I understand being Natural Born the same way the traditional Catholic Church sees annulments. It is a declaration that a valid marriage did not take place. However, even though it didn’t, yo still have to get a formal declaration to get that fact recognized.
Thank you for your clarification and understanding.
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.