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

Skip to comments.

WaPo (Op-Ed): Ted Cruz Not Eligible
Washington Post ^ | January 12, 2016 | Mary Brigid McManamon

Posted on 01/12/2016 10:09:44 AM PST by Behind the Blue Wall

Donald Trump is actually right about something: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is not a natural-born citizen and therefore is not eligible to be president or vice president of the United States.

The Constitution provides that "No person except a natural born citizen . . . shall be eligible to the office of President." The concept of "natural born" comes from the common law, and it is that law the Supreme Court has said we must turn to for the concept's definition. On this subject, the common law is clear and unambiguous. The 18th-century English jurist William Blackstone, the preeminent authority on it, declared natural-born citizens are "such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England," while aliens are "such as are born out of it."

. . .

Cruz is, of course, a U.S. citizen. As he was born in Canada, he is not natural born. His mother, however, is an American, and Congress has provided by statute for the naturalization of children born abroad to citizens. Because of the senator's parentage, he did not have to follow the lengthy naturalization process that aliens without American parents must undergo. Instead, Cruz was naturalized at birth.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cds; cruz; eligibility; naturalborncitizen; nonsense; presidential
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 461-464 next last
To: SubMareener
INSIGHTFUL ANALYSIS DESERVES A REPEAT Cruz is a citizen but he CANNOT be considered a natural born citizen; he is a citizen by statute.

His birth in Canada indicates he has THREE countries (The US via his mother, Canada his birthplace, and Cuba thru his father) having a legitimate claim on his allegiance from birth, whether he wanted it or not.

Our constitution and the rule of law must prevail. We should not yield to the same dark impulses of expediency and delusion that gave us the tyrannical sociopathic usurper demagogue Obama.

Choosing candidates who are creatures of the cult of personality has proved disastrous.

161 posted on 01/12/2016 11:08:08 AM PST by Liz (SAFE PLACE? A liberal's mind. Nothing's there. Nothing can penetrate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

If anyone wants to see the 1000 post thread from 2013 on this topic

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3084995/posts


162 posted on 01/12/2016 11:08:21 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

That Canada chose to also bestow citizenship on him, without any request on his part, is an irrelevant part of this argument.


163 posted on 01/12/2016 11:08:41 AM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

The only person with standing (harmed) would have been Hillary. He bought her off with DoS

ANy of the current candidates who place under him. Maybe Random PAUL. He certainly could be considered a supporter of constitution
Trump is giving Cruz a chance to save face.
But remember if Cruz is said to not qualify it opens up BHO too.


164 posted on 01/12/2016 11:08:43 AM PST by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Obama’s so called election was bought and paid for. Remember, McCain was vetted in the SR511 and Obama and Hillary both agreed to the definition of NBC as being born on US soil of two American citizen parents. Obama was never vetted.

I’m a Texan and would like to vote for Cruz but will not. He is not a NBC. He was 1) not born on US soil and 2) his father wasn’t an American citizen. I’m fine with him holding public office but not POTUS.


165 posted on 01/12/2016 11:09:55 AM PST by bgill (CDC site, "We still do not know exactly how people are infected with Ebola")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SubMareener
Had Cruz been born in 1921 under the identical birth circumstances that he was born into in 1970, than he would not even have been a US citizen. The Cable Act, passed in 1922, allowed a US citizen woman, married to a foreign national and who gives birth in a foreign country, to transmit US citizenship onto the newborn child for the first time.
Article II, Section I clause 5, was ratified in 1791 with the rest of the constitution, long before the Cable Act.. Article I has not been modified by any subsequent amendment. Accordingly, the original intent and meaning of Article II stands absent any such constitutional amendment.
The purpose of Article II, Section I clause 5 was to prevent undue foreign influence on the office of the presidency, PARTICULARLY thru a father owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. The framers took their definition for NBC from Emmerich De Vattel Law of Nations, the 212th paragraph of which was quoted in its entirety in the 1814 Venus Merchantman SCOTUS decision. The Law of Nations is referred to in Article I of the constitution. That definition referred to an NBC as being born of two citizen parents and born on the soil of the nation. That definition was cited in the 1868 case of Minor vs Hapersett, and Wong Kim Ark vs US. De Vattel has been cited and accepted in dozens of SCOTUS and federal lower court rulings. The framers were patriarchs who believed that the citizenship of the children followed the citizenship of the father.
The authors of the 14th amendment, Senators Howard Jacob and Rep. Bingham also defined an NBC in similar terms.
Obama is the very embodiment and personification of the REASON that the framers put those protections into the constitution. By ignoring it, we have opened ourselves to the anti American and unconstitutional tyranny that Obama poses to our constitutional republic.
Ted Cruz is head and shoulders the best candidate in the race. He is a patriot who loves this country and its people. He is intellectually and philosophically superior to ANYONE else in the race. As much as I admire him, He CANNOT be considered a natural born citizen, as he is a citizen by statute. He was born with THREE countries (The US, Canada, and Cuba thru his father) having a legitimate claim on his allegiance from birth, whether he wanted it or not. I believe in the constitution and the rule of law, NOT in the cult of personality. We should not yield to the same dark impulses of expediency and delusion that gave us the tyrannical sociopathic usurper demagogue Obama.

Ted Cruz: full name:
Rafael Edward Cruz: was born in Calgary, Canada, in 1970. His family was living there because his father was working for the petroleum industry at the time. They moved when he was four. Cruz grew up in Texas and graduated from high school there, later attending Princeton University and Harvard Law School.

From Google regarding the requirements for being POTUS:
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.

Bottom line:
His mother was American. His father was Cuban and HE worked for the petroleum business in Canada.
Cruz DID live in the USA the necessary amount of time. Princeton and Harvard graduate as well.
He IS eligible.

The underline is MINE.

166 posted on 01/12/2016 11:10:12 AM PST by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
Yes I do, but that still does NOT CHANGE the United States Supreme Court Rulings on "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" .

Here's the supporting article from Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow in constitutional studies and editor-in-chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review.
Like most immigrants, he does a job Americans won't: defending the Constitution.

The Naturalization Act of 1790, let's read it , too, SINCE IT WAS WRITTEN BY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS !

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled,

167 posted on 01/12/2016 11:11:00 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's SIMPLE ! ... Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: SubMareener

Amen.


168 posted on 01/12/2016 11:11:21 AM PST by Liz (SAFE PLACE? A liberal's mind. Nothing's there. Nothing can penetrate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans
WRONG !
Read comment #167 !
169 posted on 01/12/2016 11:14:06 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's SIMPLE ! ... Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

Agreed but why is it so hard for some to grasp the fact that the draft was purposely changed to add the word natural before born? Do they believe the founders who were so exact and careful were in this case just messing around?

It is not that Ted Cruz is not a loyal citizen, but that another country, at the time of his birth could claim his allegiance.

In the colonial times of courts and kings and heredity, intrigue was rife and this was for Jay ( who had great experience in the manners and matters of Europe) exactly why he proposed the Constitution guard against this in the office of the chief executive.

Some might say that today this is quaint and unnecessary, and say so even after the damage and destruction of the second usurper and current occupier.

We waste words here among those who choose politics over truth. Shortly, they will learn that politics is a cutting instrument and there are many on the usurper’s side who will pull their swords and hack away on T. Cruz should he be nominated.


170 posted on 01/12/2016 11:14:09 AM PST by Badboo (Why it is important)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain
Sorry, the proper underlining is: a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution. Ted Cruz was not alive in 1790.
171 posted on 01/12/2016 11:14:34 AM PST by SubMareener (Save us from Quarterly Freepathons! Become a MONTHLY DONOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest
WRONG !

Why do you capitalize "wrong" for? Did you think it might fool people into believing you're right?

172 posted on 01/12/2016 11:14:54 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion
Why is it so hard to understand that if you are born to an American, you are an American citizen from Birth?

Maybe because it is unadulterated B$. Do you not think the country in which you were born may have something to say about your citizenship?

173 posted on 01/12/2016 11:16:01 AM PST by itsahoot (Anyone receiving a Woo! Woo! for President has never won anything after the award.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick; All
Which the boss himself just settled yesterday...

"Cruz is eligible."

29 posted on 1/11/2016, 10:13:24 PM by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to to God!)

174 posted on 01/12/2016 11:16:34 AM PST by Timber Rattler ("To hold a pen is to be at war." --Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Mollypitcher1

I do believe in the Constitution. The Constitution says Cruz is a citizen.


175 posted on 01/12/2016 11:16:44 AM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

In order to train a Jack@$$, FIRST you have to get lots attention !


176 posted on 01/12/2016 11:17:30 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's SIMPLE ! ... Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

In order to train a Jack@$$, FIRST you have to get its attention !


177 posted on 01/12/2016 11:17:56 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's SIMPLE ! ... Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: South40

Law of Nations, 1758 law book
defines “natural born citizen”

The Law of Nations, used by the framers of our Constitution

was published in 1758 and was used as a college text book in America from c1770 on. Ben Franklin received three copies of the French edition in 1775 to be used by the Continental Congress, one for himself, one given to the library, and one sent to Massachusetts from the editor Dumas. Documented FACT.

Section #212, in Book 1 Chapter 19
thereof, which deals with defining “natural born” citizenship.

Chapter 19, Book 1,Ӥ 212.

” The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in
the country, of parents who are citizens.”

Note PARENTS....plural, meaning both parents. Ted Cruz’s father was Cuban, then became Canadian long before becoming American.


178 posted on 01/12/2016 11:18:41 AM PST by Mollypitcher1 (I have not yet begun to fight....John Paul Jones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Just an opinion. That is all it is from anyone.

Scalia indicated TWICE Jus Soli may be required. You can’t ignore that nor the fact that Justice Thomas said they are evading whether someone born in Puerto Rico can run for POTUS


179 posted on 01/12/2016 11:18:53 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Mollypitcher1
Please check comment 137, it`s a well reasoned, and sincerely held belief. We are by natural law birth right, free and sovereign individuals. But this concept was derived via the ever evolving concept OF the individual. If we make that concept static, then we forgo that process of evolution that ultimately gave it to us.

For good or bad, evolution is at the very heart of life itself. A similar process, in the evolution of the concept of Man and his place in the universe, brought us to the natural law derived concept of the sovereign individual, and thus, gave us the Republic it birthed. I will never surrender this concept of the right to decide, to do so undermines the very basis of the practical implementation of our freedom.

180 posted on 01/12/2016 11:19:07 AM PST by nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 461-464 next last

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.

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