Posted on 01/14/2016 6:00:17 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans
Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay told Newsmax TV on Wednesday that Ted Cruz might ultimately "end up in the courts" on the question of his citizenship and how it might affect his presidential campaign. "I've had this problem ever since Cruz announced," DeLay, the five-term Texas Republican who served from 2003 to 2005, told "The Steve Malzberg Show" in an interview.
"There is a difference between the definition of natural born and naturalization — and it has not been settled by any branch of government. "Cruz needs to address this in some way because it is a cloud right now in Iowa," DeLay said. [...]
DeLay, however, told Malzberg that the "most expedient" way for Cruz to settle any questions is to work through the courts. "You can't do anything through Congress," he said. "Congress isn't going to pass any bill to protect him — and I'm sure [President Barack] Obama wouldn’t sign anything. "He's going to the courts if he's the nominee. The Democrats will use every avenue available to them.
"They sued me over a valid issue," DeLay said, referring to a 2006 lawsuit brought by Democrats after he dropped his re-election bid. "They'll sue him. "He'll end up in the courts one way or another."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Those are the criteria of our existing immigration and naturalization statutes.
It your citizenship derives from the provisions of the immigration and naturalization statutes, it doesn't derive from nature.
You can be a citizen naturalized by statute or you can be natural born. You cannot be both.
Could two SCOTUS retire before 0Obama’s term ends? And he appoint both libs to rule against Cruz? And just think that no one would have had the nerve to use same way against dear leader.
I am all in for Cruz but I also know how dastardly evil these people are, GOPe included.
Could two SCOTUS retire before 0Obama’s term ends? And he appoint both libs to rule against Cruz? And just think that no one would have had the nerve to use same way against dear leader.
I am all in for Cruz but I also know how dastardly evil these people are, GOPe included.
Exactly...and to think I prayed that man through his own troubles.
WRONG. Put that scenario in Iran or Syria and maybe you’ll understand why the Founding Fathers said BOTH parents must be US citizens.
I don’t care if we’re talking about Cruz, Trump or Daffy Duck.
It takes two citizens of the US to birth a natural born citizen. Obama is ineligible, and the PTB were negligent for not fully vetting his qualifications and records. That does NOT give future candidates the right to continue disregarding the Constitution.
That single-parent requirement has been amended several times, but under the law in effect between 1952 and 1986 — Cruz was born in 1970 — someone must have a citizen parent who resided in the United States for at least 10 years, including five after the age of 14, in order to be considered a natural-born citizen. Cruz’s mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware, lived most of her life in the United States, and gave birth to little Rafael Edward Cruz in her 30s. Q.E.D.
So why all the brouhaha about where Obama was born, given that there’s no dispute that his mother, Ann Dunham, was a citizen? Because his mother was 18 when she gave birth to the future president in 1961 and so couldn’t have met the 5-year-post-age-14 residency requirement. Had Obama been born a year later, it wouldn’t have mattered whether that birth took place in Hawaii, Kenya, Indonesia, or anywhere else. (For those born since 1986, by the way, the single citizen parent must have only resided here for five years, at least two of which must be after the age of 14.)
(As a reminder... he is only 45, and yet he has still: authored 80 SCOTUS briefs, made 40 Oral Arguments to SCOTUS, was Solicitor General of Texas for five years (the longest tenure in Texas history), was a partner at the law firm, served as a law clerk to Chief Justice William Rehnquist, assembled the coalition of 31 states in defense of the principle that the 2nd Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms, successfully defended the Ten Commandments monument on the Texas State Capitol grounds, the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools and the majority of the 2003 Texas redistricting plan, successfully defended (Medellin v. Texas) an attempt by the International Court of Justice to re-open the criminal convictions of 51 murderers on death row throughout the United States. He was also Director of the Office of Policy Planning at the Federal Trade Commission, Domestic Policy Advisor to U.S. President George W. Bush on the 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign, was an Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin, and is currently junior US Senator from Texas. On November 14, 2012, Cruz was appointed vice-chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. He is now spearheading efforts in the Senate to have Obamacare repealed root-and-branch... In his younger years, he won the National Debate Championship for Princeton, and came in second in the World Debate Championships for Harvard. There are also plenty of "youngest-ever" and "first-ever-Hispanic to" titles that he has claimed, but I'll leave those out of this substantive list.)
No, you got part of the phrase wrong and you left out the full phrase.
"Children of citizens of the United States".
Furthermore, it specifically references fathers.
Understood.
In that case the Founders got it wrong. I believe the present day court would resolve that with the 14th amendment.
Problem: unsettled law
Solution: declarative judgement
If someone intends to keep Cruze off the ballot in a state or states they need to get busy with the lawsuit (s) or challege (s). Ballots will be printed very soon in a majority of the states based on the dates for deadlines for a request for an absentee ballot.
Also I expect that sort of challenge would be settled quickly because it would be in the individual states’ best interest to do so.
That literally made no difference for you.
In that case the Founders got it wrong.
lol
I believe the present day court would resolve that with the 14th amendment.
14th amendment does nothing for those born overseas, nor does it change how natural born citizens are, well, born.
I think James Madison clearly did since he went to the trouble of removing the words natural born citizens and replacing them with the word citizens.
Madison's thoughts on the subject are recorded.He believed that the place of one's birth was the most reasonable guarantee of one's allegiance.
“Why didn’t these GOPers insist that Barack Hussein Obama “settle” this?”
Agreed, worth repeating.
And when it is Trump vs Cruz, who do the mainline, long-time politicians line up behind?
By the laws of 1790 and 1795, George Washington would not have considered Cruz eligible for the presidency. The relevant portion of the 1790 laws says: And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States:
INCONVENIENT FACTOIDS
<><> At the time of his birth in Canada, Cruz's father was either a Cuban citizen, or a Canadian living in Canada, pursuing Canadian citizenship; he had not established an intent to be loyal to the USA and was actually listed w/ his American born-wife on the list of Canadian electors.
<><> Constitutional scholar, Ted Cruz, w/ two Ivy League degrees, including a law degree, has, no doubt, rigorously studied the issue of his citizenship down to the minutest detail.
<><> Cruz rightly says he is a US citizen but he surely knows he CANNOT be considered a natural born citizen; b/c he is a citizen by virtue of statute.
<><> Cruzs 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.
==============================================
The US 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.
If we, the people, accept anything less than the constitution's original intent, frightening scenarios would unfold. Such as allowing the offspring of an American who joined ISIS and birthed a child in the Mideast w/ say, a Syrian, to claim eligibility for the office.
Cruz blasting anyone who dares say he isn't a citizen is very telling.
“If Congress has to pass legislation in order to make you a citizen at birth, then, by definition, you are naturalized”
By US law, naturalization is defined as something one starts AFTER birth. Not big on the law, are you...
Oh yes it did.
So, can you explain it in any rational way? This will be fun to watch.
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.