Posted on 01/16/2016 6:13:39 PM PST by Enlightened1
The Republicans are almost as crazy as the Democrats. I don’t know if I trust any of the Republican candidates but I will choose the lesser of two evils once again. The future of our country just looks ugly tome. It’s bad enough now.
“Just like the kids born to military families overseas” is he object of debate. Military and Foreign Service fall into their own category. I have been told by military families who have a kid or kids born overseas that they had to go thru some paperwork to get those kids’ citizenship status worked out. Even more so would be the case for someone engaged in private enterprise.
I have no idea what Cruz knew or when he knew it, but he’s an extraordinarily bright person who managed to get thru Princeton and Harvard Law School. One would think that somewhere along the line he’d have questioned his citizenship status, knowing at a minimum that he was born outside the United States.
Seriously, he’s known for years now that ultimately he wanted to run for POTUS. He can’t have missed the brouhaha over Obama. And he never wondered what his own status was? Dunno, but that lack of curiosity sure strikes me as interesting.
Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship.
It should be a requirement. Remember when Ted Kennedy offered his help to the soviets to derail Reagans plans? Or all those pinkos meeting with Ortega. The left has no loyalties except to the party. To them, the party is everything. rather Disgusting when you think about it.
OK, so Mr. Bingham would say that someone like Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada, would be an adopted citizen of the United States. Marco Rubio would be a natural born citizen because he was born in the Republic and both of his parents owed allegiance to the United States only, because they were here under the Cuban refugee statutes and were later naturalized.
However, this conflicts with what Ted Cruz wants, so the Constitution must be bent, but just a little! What harm can come from bending the Constitution just a little?
Rubio was not born of American citizen parents. So he most definitely would NOT have been considered a citizen of this country, much less a natural born citizen of this country, by Mr. Bingham.
But two? Where is the blood loyalty?
****************
Don’t forget papa Cruz came out of Cuba.... He did renouce
his birth loyalty to Canada sometime back.
Mr. Bingham says “of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty”. He didn’t say they had to be citizens. It is pretty clear from their actions at the time that they had no allegiance to Cuba, and they confirmed that by becoming naturalized citizens.
I believe he probably did. And, if Canadian law is similar to US citizenship law, he would've found that, in order to exert his Canadian citizenship, he would've had to declare for it upon reaching his majority. Otherwise, it lapses.
Since he never did, he technically ceased to be a Canadian citizen. And, legally, it wasn't an issue.
Accordingly, it wasn't legally necessary for him to subsequently renounce his Canadian citizenship -- but he did so anyway, just to clarify matters.
By the way, I've discussed this issue with several military families, as well. The "paperwork issue" involves having to file the child's locally-generated birth certificate with the American consulate. The consulate then issues the certification of the child's American citizenship. Evidently, it's not uncommon for parents to fail to take this step at the time of birth. So that, when the child becomes an adult and seeks a passport, e.g., the paperwork process to prove citizenship with the State Department has to be gone through, say, 25 years after the fact.
Evidently, all of Cruz's paperwork was completed at the time of his birth and is on file with the American consulate in Calgary.
All of which is to say that Cruz is an American citizen-at-birth, meeting the natural-born standard, and is eligible to serve as president. Legally, his Canadian birth is a non-issue. But, politically, his opponents are trying to make it one.
Until they were naturalized citizens of the United States, they were still “subject to the jurisdiction of” Cuba.
Link?
Mr. Bingham says “of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty”. He didn’t say “subject to the jurisdiction of” another sovereignty. If it were up to the other sovereignty, all Canada would have to do is say the Ted Cruz is still a citizen of Canada and he would be done.
True, he did renounce; however, it wasn’t necessary as far as satisfying any obligation to the US.
Although they seem to sort of shrug at dual citizenship, the US recognizes only US citizenship as long as we don’t establish residency in another country, by voting or fighting in a foreign army, etc.
Somewhere I remember reading that the US recognizes dual citizenship with Israel (and maybe one other country, not sure).
In the Amendment in question itself, the language used was “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Since he was not a subject or citizen of our country, he had to be subject to the jurisdiction of another country that isn’t ours.
If it is read otherwise, then anyone can come here, and as long as they claim allegiance personally, with no input from We the People at all, they are in like Flynn.
That puts them in control, instead of the people of this country.
That is not tenable.
And the fact that we allowed them here as guests has nothing to do with it. Our imprimatur for citizenship has not been given.
Can the burglar or the house guest claim adoption into your family based solely on the fact of their presence in your house?
That language in the 14th Amendment requires no renunciation of allegiance to the other country. So if Marco’s parents were in the country legally, they are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. An Ambassador from another country, ore anyone with diplomatic immunity, for example, would not be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. An the Congress can easily extend that to illegal invaders as well.
However, if the Supreme Court rules on this and says you have to be born on American soil of American parents, I am OK with that. It eliminates Ted and Marco, but that is OK. We still have Trump, Carson, Bush, Christy, Paul, Kasich, Fiorino, Huckabee, and Santorum to pick from.
Again, if that is the rule, then we are saying that a house guest can claim adoption into your family, based solely on their presence in your home.
And if the Supreme Court so rules, they will be once again ruling against the laws of nature, and the Constitution.
A ruling that should then be ignored, being null and void.
And let’s not forget Leahy who, as Chmn of the ‘Intelligence Committee’ leaked info to Daniel Ortega who was a Soviet surrogate during the Cold War.
“...the US recognizes dual citizenship with Israel (and maybe one other country, not sure).”
Since the 60s the US has recognized a number of ‘dual citizenship’ countries. One fellow I knew had American/Israeli/Irish citizenship. My son-in-law and his family are all dual American-French. One of their sons-in-law is dual American-Belgian I’ve been told there’s a possibility I could be dual since my grandmother was born in Ireland. Not interested. Just don’t believe in dual citizenship. Period. Period.
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.