Posted on 02/07/2016 6:49:10 AM PST by Robert DeLong
Does no one understand the concept of natural law anymore?
Is critical thinking beyond most Americans?
One can only NATURALLY be a US citizen when there are no other possibilities.
Natural born citizen.
Born here of citizen parents.
That piece of garbage has been proven to be a pack of lies countless times. Read it in detail and you can see it for yourself, and then note other legal scholars have trashed the article for those lies.
There are SCOTUS decisions about “natural born” citizens. One of them came after Pres. Garfield appointed a new justice to the bench. Subsequently he was unqualified because his father obtained citizenship after Garfield was born, so the ‘parents’ (plural) could not apply. Garfield’s appointee saved his butt with Ark Kim Wok decision, confusing the issue for future generations.
That only applies to naturalization, has nothing to do with regards to “natural born” meaning.
Churchill’s mother was an expatriate. She went to Britain to marry and she became a subject of the Queen.
Katyal and Clement also ignore hundreds of other precedents on the question of the type of citizenship associated with persons born-abroad. All of the precedents in perfect accord, if a person born-abroad is a US citizen, he or she is a naturalized US citizen.
The Constitution is positive law. Better read what Story had to say about the qualifications for President.
-— Does no one understand the concept of natural law anymore? -—
If you go on vacation to Canada with your pregnant wife and she delivers a baby, the baby would have to be a Canadian citizen, right?
Does that make sense to you? It doesn’t make any sense to me.
I still think it would be in Ted Cruz's interest, and more importantly, the nation's interest to clarify how "natural born" is to be applied. This must happen in the U.S. Supreme Court, and immediately in my opinion.
You are exactly right:
2 citizen parents and born on the soil.
This was Cruz’s own descrption in 2012 - before his ambition got the best of him.
Destroying this principle will have the same effect as desroying our borders. The concept of being a US citizen is being purposely diminished.
If your wife gives birth in a country that claims children born there as citizens, then the child is a citizen of that country. The United States does this, other countries do as well. Why does that not make sense to you?
That has nothing to do with the Cruz case. His parents were lawful permanent residents of Canada. The difference between being a lawful permanent resident of Canada, and being a sojourner in Canada, may have play in Canadian citizenship law. I think it does, but at any rate, Canadian citizenship is a question of Canadian law.
Ted Cruz was born a Candian citizen.
I notice your post said nothing about US citizenship.
That’s how I have always interpreted it, with the only exception being that someone born out of the country, due to their parents being in that foreign land were in service to the nation, would still be considered “natural born”
Cool beans !
Still trying to use the infamous ‘Dred Scott’ case.
Roflol
The unique quality of Natural Born is that it is exclusive, and therefore obvious.
With Natural Born, there are no options, no questions and no doubts.
With Natural Born, there is no need of a law to define it, nor a lawyer to argue it, nor Supreme Court to decide it.
Whatever you choose call it, "born in country to citizen parents" is as basic and obvious as citizenship gets.
Any and every other situation comes with different legal, psychological and ideological aspects and are therefore NOT the same as "born in country to citizen parents".
Any and every other situation requires a decision by someone in authority, to determine which citizenship legally applies from the possible options, and is covered under naturalization law.
The work currently being done to redefine NBC is not just some simple political gamesmanship being used to satisfy our unrequited political infatuations.
Calling different things all by the same name is a form of intellectual dishonesty that sabotages integrity and leads to insanity.
Just for consideration, what does it mean when authority forces you to agree with a lie and then act as though it is truth?
(Just for grins, who in history is known as "The Deceiver"?)
Rebellion against fundamentals might work "in the moment", but always leads to a fall, and then destruction.
According to the Naturalization Act of 1790 they are considered "natural born" citizens if all of the above exceptions can be answered satisfactorily with regards to the exceptions listed above.
“That’s true, but Ted was born in Canada, thus the confusion as to the meaning of “natural born†citizen and if it applied to Ted Cruz.”
There is zero excuse for confusion, because Ted Cruz is a naturalized citizen of the United States by the authority of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952, which automatically naturalizes the child born abroad with one alien parent and one U.S. parent.
66 Stat. Public Law 414 - June 27, 1952. TITLE III - NATIONALITY AND NATURALIZATION. Chapter 1 - Nationality at Birth and by Collective Naturalization. NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH. Sec. 301. (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth; . . . (7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at lest five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.
U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 7
Consular Affairs. 7 FAM 1151 INTRODUCTION... b. 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(23); INA 101(a)(23)) defines naturalization as the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth by any means whatsoever. . . For the purposes of this subchapter naturalization includes:... (5) “Automatic”  acquisition of U.S. citizenship after birth, a form of naturalization by certain children born abroad to U.S. citizen parents or children adopted abroad by U.S. citizen parents.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456, 42 L.Ed. said “A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized....”
The U.S. Supreme Court stated very clearly: “A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized....” Ted Cruz was without any doubt whatsoever “born out of the jurisdiction of the United States” and he also without doubt “can only become a citizen by being naturalized” just as stated by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"ll the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase "natural born Citizen" has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time.">
Vattel's says "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. " So the statement above is an appeal to authority but falsely claims that "all" such authorities are in agreement.
And why does the article refer to Common law as "two sources"? "The Supreme Court has long recognized that two particularly useful sources in understanding constitutional terms are British common law. "
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.