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

To: Perdogg; P-Marlowe
The 2 questions are: (1) Would Rubio be ruled eligible by today's courts? and (2) Is Rubio, in fact, a natural born citizen?

(1). Since the law currently recognizes birthright citizens as being natural born citizens, then Rubio will be eligible. In one sense, it makes moot any additional discussion.

2. Is the law wrong? Is Rubio, in fact, a natural born citizen? Research done into the date of his birth (1970?) and the date of BOTH parent's naturalization (1975?) suggest that Rubio was not an NBC at the time of his birth. With NEITHER parent an NBC at the time, this does raise questions. I had originally been told his mother was naturalized just a few years after arriving in the US and prior to Marco's birth. Documents and articles I've seen actually demonstrate her naturalization was in 1975.

This is all moot, though, in that the law, as previously stated, has ruled that born citizens are natural born citizens.

122 posted on 07/31/2012 6:45:41 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: xzins
This is all moot, though, in that the law, as previously stated, has ruled that born citizens are natural born citizens.

The law once ruled that slaves were property and still rules that unborn children are.

Let us not rely on some ruling of law or other as being the equivalent to what is the truth. Any such ruling by any legal bodies is incorrect, and we should not put much stock in it just because it comes from some legal body.

210 posted on 08/01/2012 12:10:25 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | 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