Posted on 03/13/2013 6:54:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Let's close down the silly season on presidential eligibility early. Our colleague, Ken Klukowski, is a constitutional lawyer who argues here that newly-sworn-in Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) is likely eligible to run for president in 2016. The only question that could arise is the fact the fiery young conservative leader was born in Calgary, Alberta, on Dec. 22, 1970. Let's see: 1970 makes him thirty-five in 2005. He's in!
Is the Canadian birthplace a hurdle? Not really. Since at least 1793, such children of American citizens born abroad have been recognized to be American citizens.
Ted's mother, the former Eleanor Darragh, was an American citizen from Delaware. To argue that his actual place of birth to an American citizen disqualifies Ted Cruz is to argue that millions of undoubted Americans are disqualified. What about military "brats" born in civilian hospitals to parents stationed in West Germany? Or sons and daughters of American business people temporarily working abroad? Or children of U.S. citizens who are missionaries called to foreign lands?
Can conservatives seriously believe that any of these otherwise qualified American citizens should be barred from running for president? We thought as conservatives we are opposed to assisted suicide. But reading the Constitution in such a strained and absurd way would render us politically dead.
Some people, unfortunately, are maintaining that anyone whose parents were not yet fully naturalized U.S. citizens are ineligible. That's because, they say, only the children of U.S. citizens can be "natural-born citizens of the United States" under the Constitution's requirements for being elected president (Art. II, Sec. 1). They say that because of this iron-clad condition, Florida's Sen. Marco Rubio, and possibly even South Carolina 's Gov. Nikki Haley and Louisiana 's Gov. Bobby Jindal may all be ineligible to serve as president.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Get serious. Who here doubts they will be incinerated by media smears right before the 2016 elections?
Regardless to nobama setting a precedent and the progressive liberals lack of care what the Constitution says, we as conservatives should care and should maintain to the letter and original intent.
This article's argument that the first few POTUS were not NBC, is ridiculous because the Founding Fathers considered America to be America long before the Revolution and freedom from Brittan.
If some Constitutional authority can explain NBC, please tell us in the purest sense what the Founding Father meant.
That said, it sure seems that our most conservative new Stars have an NBC question. I would be delighted if any one of them could be eligible, especially Cruz, who seems to know and love the Constitution more than most and certainly more than the GOPe crowd we are saddled with now.
Cruz is a minority.
He’s a conservative in the GOP....
The Gringo Stars seem to be either hiding, no interest in politics or happily GOPe.
Please advise us differently.
All three are scheduled to speak at the CPAC. While I feel it’s much too early for 2016. I’m waiting for someone to bring these topics up;
When the democrats decided to remove God or any reference to Our Creator at their 2012 convention. They also demonstrated they are no longer the democratic party of your father’s father. They have become a hyphenated radical unit and should be known as Demo-Coms dedicated to the establishment of a collective idealism using the device of PCP to modify behavior and shed beliefs that they believe would impede remaking their concept of the perfect utopian state. That is hardly democratic because the word democrat idealizes the individual voice.
But Rove, GOPES (GOP Elite Snobs) and RINOS lack the capacity or the understanding or the courage to point to the historic radicalization that occured at that moment and use it politically. Worse yet they are unable to forthrightly defend what the demo-coms have set out to destroy and some are even comming up with their own version of PCP .
Anyone preaching PCP is going down the poisonous road to oblivion . Following a policy of PCP. Politically Correct Politics which the hyphenated democrat party, the Demo-Coms,is using is flat out wrong.Worse yet moral questions such as marriage, sexual practices, family constituency and particularly beliefs those of containing Judeo Christian tenets are being assulted and not defended. That offers a majority of voters no choice in the direction this country is to take.
PCP when used by the Demo-Coms such terms as: Afro-American, Hispanic-American, Asian-American, White-American, Rich-American ,Gay-American, are more than simply nouns but vehicles used to separate US from each other. Beside separating US from our money the Demo-Coms demand we become adhearents to a system without the constituional constraints on government. Thus surrendering our protections from governmental abuses and excessive bureacracy to the will of a bureaucratic collective which is no longer answerable to the average citizen.
Sadly for the Republicans God remains in Limbo..
It was not until Martin Van Buren, eighth president, that we elected a man who had been born an American citizen”
But they had all been born in colonies that became states. I’m not sure I grasp this argument....
Washington was born in Virginia. But Cruz was born in Canada. That seems to me a big difference and one that the Constitution could certainly intend.
That said, I am strongly or Cruz, and at this stage, I don’t care whether he was born in Canada or not. There is no Constitution. Let’s simply admit that.
So, given that, I don’t see that we should throw away the remaining shards of liberty that we have by stopping a Cruz candidacy based on fidelity to a non-existent Constitution. If Cruz were to get in, he could do great things to put a Constitution back in the mix...even if he was born in Canada.....
This is dishonest argumentation. As the writer of the article is surely aware, the same clause that mentions the "natural born" requirement also exempts from it those who were citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. See below:
"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."
(Art. 2, sec. 1)
We'll see come next primary season.
Speculation from this far out is pointless.
He is my choice out of this bunch if he does qualify. He's the real deal.
Hence the inclusion of the "...or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution..." clause in Article II. Or haven't Mr. Blackwell or Mr. Morrison ever read the Constitution to begin with?
Let’s not be too hung up on race.
These talented Republican politicians deserve our respect and the hopes that they will win prime elections that will place them in charge of the nation or Congress.
However, with that said, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS TRUMPS ALL! White people are hated by minorities as a whole. This hatred is fueled by Obama and his “brown shirts” along with gullible women and woosified males....(I won’t call them men).
These Republicans are true Americans and regardless as to their ethnic backgrounds, have fully assimilated into our society and are an asset to our conservative society.
They are only hope we have left. If they are prevented from running by RINO-E and corrupt government, we have no chance to save our country at all.
Wrong. The Constitution is alive and well in the hearts and minds of millions of Americans.
Yes expediency and survival (as we may see it in today’s vision) may say fight fire with fire by disregarding NBC.
The way it is going now, America will be broken apart and I want to be with the part that keeps the Constitution.
RE: I don’t know when Cruz’s dad was made a citizen. If it was AFTER Ted was born, then no, he doesn’t Constitutionally qualify.
I direct you to this page:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/2995704/posts?page=144#144
and to post #11 of this thread.
It seems like based on the writings of the early legislators and framers, and previous elections (see at the time of Lincoln), he does.
Cruz, Haley, Jindal, Rubio...
Caucasian, Caucasian, Caucasian, Caucasian...
You mean White Hispanic, White Indian, White Indian, White Hispanic...
Neither the Primary nor the election will over-ride the Constitution. A slim majority may indeed say “screw the Constitution” but that was not the question or the point.
Say what?
The Constitution now prohibits anyone but minorities from running for president?
So both establishment Republicans and Democrats would probably be OK with this. The Democrats even more so since it would validate Obama's eligibility and they could concentrate on making the folks who disagree with the ruling sit out 2016. Hello President Hillary Clinton!
Cruz = dual citizen at birth (14th amendment American)
Jindal = Indian (or dual) citizen at birth (14th amendment American) (I don’t remember if both his parents naturalized after he was born or not)
Rubio = Cuban (or dual) citizen at birth (14th amendment American)
Haley = don’t know her story and not worth my time to look it up right now.
NATURAL born Citizen = dual citizen = 14th amendment citizen ?????
Not sure how you work the math on this to make them eligible for POTUS.
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.