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

To: ought-six

Would you please address the issues I raised in my last reply to you?


26 posted on 01/09/2016 9:10:33 AM PST by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Sham

Sure. It is YOUR interpretation that the “natural born citizen” of the 1790 Act was changed to “citizen” in the 1795 Act, apparently to change a definition. Unless I am reading you incorrectly, you seem to be implying that there is a difference between the “natural born citizen” of the 1790 Act and the “citizen” of 1795 Act, such that the “citizen” of the 1795 Act would be ineligible to serve as president.

If that is your interpretation, it is unique to you, and it is not an opinion held by legal scholars or recognized law.

Simple test: (1) Is Ted Cruz an American citizen? Yes or No; If Yes, then (2) Is Ted Cruz’s citizenship natural (i.e., established at his birth), or was it the result of the citizenship naturalization process? Yes or No.

If your answer to #1 is Yes, then #2 must either be “natural” or “naturalized.” If not naturalized, then Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen and can serve as president. I submit to you that the law would hold that Ted Cruz’s citizenship was not a naturalized citizenship, and thus he can serve as president.


29 posted on 01/09/2016 9:25:14 AM PST by ought-six (Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | 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