Posted on 01/19/2015 8:03:28 PM PST by SoConPubbie
Citizen by statute means that we confer citizenship by law as opposed to citizenship by natural allegiance. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE doubts that anyone born of two parents who are citizens INSIDE the country in which both parents are citizens is NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. No law is needed to establish this person’s citizenship BECAUSE it occurs by a natural process. But, there are obviously circumstances that need statutory language to clear up ambiguities should they occur. Say a person is born in Britain to a mother who is American, and a father who is English? The child, depending on English law could be English, and in actual fact is, but also could be American, and in actual fact is also. But these facts are established by laws, not by natural means. Suppose America disallowed dual citizenship, or England likewise disallowed dual citizenship, or England required that the child’s citizenship be that of the father.. or mother.. or that America required the child be born in country.. These are the simple problems. There are many more complicated problems. The basic point is this: Laws are needed when there is any circumstance that exists without the natural manifestation of citizenship.
” Ever notice when the “Talking Heads” talk about 2016 possibles, they never mention Ted Cruz? I wonder why?”
They are afraid of him.
” “For people waiting to come in our country legally, we’ve got to make sure that they get in first, that they get their status first, because they’ve been following the rules and playing by the rules. After that, if there is a way to set up a process so that you enable people to come in and have a legal pathway to do that, that’s something we’ve got to embrace.” – Scott Walker”
Goodbye, Mr Walker!
No reason not to talk about both ... we're intelligent adults. Ending the socialist welfare state will certainly alter the discussion of immigration, both legal and illegal. Ending the unsustainable gravy train will eliminate one fairly powerful attractor for illegal immigration.
True. But where is it defined that that is the only definition of natural born citizen?
But these facts are established by laws, not by natural means.
But if Congress is empowered by the Constitution to establish rules of naturalization then wouldn't it mean that they must also establish, by law, who does not need to be naturalized? And since the Constitution identifies only two forms of citizenship then if you are not naturalized then you must be, by default, natural-born.
I didn’t mean to turn it back on you, so please accept my Apology. I simply do not know what Law people refer to when referring to what constitutes a Natural Born Citizen.
Like many here, I always assumed it meant a Child of two American Citizens, born on United States soil.
After going though numerous Threads regarding Obama’s, McCain’s and even Cruz’s Citizenship over the last six years, it appears my assumption may have not been correct.
I am just looking for clarification based on current “Law”. Thanks...
We need a communicator, a conservative, and a Christian.
Cruz is the only candidate who is all of those.
Exactly. No matter what anyone says or thinks, the current law controls. Black's dictionary is not the current law. Vattel is not current law. So and so's opinion is not current.
The only thing that is current law IS current law. And current law says that Cruz is eligible.
Yes. And current law is the definition of natural born citizen when the Constitution was written.
Evidently, you haven’t read current law.
The democrats won’t have to bring this up, the Republican boot-lickers will gladly do so to peel off Cruz votes for the Huckster or the Rube resulting in yet another split vote and another Party anointed liberal LOSER, but he will have that all important (R) in front of his name.
8 US Code Para. 1401
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401
Cruz’s case is in sub -paragraph (g).
Previously, you were an unregistered "citizen-at-birth". Had you died between the time of your birth and the time of your registration, you were still an American "citizen-at-birth" and would've been buried as such.
You completely miss the point. Neither Congress, nor the courts can reinterpret the Constitution. An easy way for you to understand... Is a citizen automatically a natural born citizen, even at birth? If you say yes, then the words natural born had no meaning when the Constitution was written. How sad. What other words do you need to discount to get your way I wonder?
Some Freepers really scare me. The one’s who know a little bit most of all. Yes... there are MANY ways to be a citizen. And there are also many ways to be born a citizen. There is only ONE way to be a natural born citizen: Be born in the country in which both of your parents are citizens. Thank you for playing.
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.