Posted on 01/17/2016 5:18:24 PM PST by usafa92
Mark Levin has spent years defending the Constitution, his radio show bumpers refer to him as "Mr. Constitution". In his view, the constitutional debates and the views of the founding fathers should determine its meaning.
Levin has abandoned this standard in his defense of Ted Cruz's eligibility to run for President. This is evident in at least two ways - ignoring the founders' intentions and arguments, and suggesting that there are only two types of citizenship: naturalized and natural born. Levin revisits this issue with exasperation every day, knocking Mr. Trump and others for discussing it. Last week he referred to the issue as a 'turd in the swimming pool'. Let's examine it.
Canada is a possession of the English Crown. The analog in the founders time was England itself. Levin is suggesting that a person born after the founding, in England, with English citizenship, to parents of mixed allegiance, would have passed the founders' scrutiny. That idea should seem absurd on its face.
(Excerpt) Read more at trumpcampaignanalysis.blogspot.com ...
No court is going to touch this issue with a ten-foot pole; aside from the fact that there is no issue.
No credible lawyer would dare file a lawsuit. They’d be the laughing stock of the legal world. I doubt even Trump could find a credible lawyer to file such a lawsuit.
Trump is trying to blow smoke up the ass. Sad thing is some people actually believe him. Trump will never file a lawsuit.
Tribe is not a reliable source. Never has been. Never will be. What comes out of his mouth at ANY moment have zero value because he is pushing a leftist agenda. What does Michael Moore say? Is his word suddenly relevant. I’d double check if Lawrence said the sky comes up in the east this morning. This is getting ridiculous. Next, you all will be quoting Chuck Schumer and De Blasio.
We were always taught in school, born in the U.S. of two citizen parents. I remember it being pretty well understood that if you were born outside the U.S. for any reason, you couldn’t be President. That was just the way it was. Seems to me a lot of people are clouding the waters of what used to be a pretty widely understood standard.
He never said he would. He said others have threatened to do so. One did.
Believe it's now being reported he will sue, after saying he would not sue because it is a real problem after he said it was not a problem.
Did I miss anything?
You lack of knowledge about civil procedure is truly amazing. Hell, you don't even know how to spell judgment.
Since Trump's mother wasn't born in the U.S. shouldn't Trump seek a declaratory judgment.
.
Keep on being a fool.
There exists no written premise in law upon which a court could rely to find what you are dying to hear.
But there is much to the contrary.
.
He is a “con man”. I have seen many of his type through life and have gotten pretty good at figuring them out.
Ah, I see.
Well, I appreciate you’re showing me that.
But as a listener of Levin’s, I know that he attempts to discredit anyone who brings this stuff up as kooks or focusing things that don’t matter or any number of ways of shutting them down as fast as possible.
I would not call Levin unhinged at all, if I thought he was, I wouldn’t listen to him everyday.
I just can’t figure out why he instantly writes off any concern of this matter.
I think Ted is NBC, but I am concerned that someone can and will find a judge that doesn’t, and that could potentially put my vote at risk or anyone who votes for him.
Maybe it won’t happen, maybe there’s an incredibly high chance it won’t happen, but I don’t think anyone can guarantee the outcome of an inquiry into it.
This isn't directed at you, personally, but that's a common argument used by the 'Living Constitution' crowd to re-interpret and redefine the Constitution's clear meaning.
The Framers didn't define ANY of the terms they used in our founding charter. It was taken as a given by them, that the people understood and comprehended the plain meaning of English words.
It's only in our modern era that people have become so illiterate, or even purposely ignorant, that they've lost the ability to read the document and broadly agree on what it actually says.
http://victorygirlsblog.com/39644-2/
There are other sites reporting the same thing, but this one has great visuals if you are a guy.
There is little doubt in my mind that Thomas Jefferson and his ilk would consider Ted Cruz to be a natural born citizen, and eminently eligible to serve as President, after diligent, balanced, and thoughtful consideration.
There is simply no practical argument regarding where Ted Cruz's loyalties now lie, or have lain, during his entire life. Inasmuch as Cruz was a US citizen at the moment of his birth, there is simply no reasonable argument that he is not natural born.
To reiterate, methinks the vast majority of the Founders themselves, under these particular circumstances, would likely be far less dogmatic than the strident ideologues who are decrying Ted Cruz's alleged ineligibility.
But the courts will settle it if necessary, and then the bitch-slapdown will come for those who trump-et what I believe amounts to near hysterical originalism.
The originalism I'm hearing from the Cruz birthers is so strident and extreme, that it would be tantamount to arguing that Citizens should only be able to own single-shot flintlock firearms, since that it what was conceived of as "arms" at the time of the adoption of the Second Amendment.
Go back in time and show the Founders a functioning full-auto M-16, and modern day 2A supporters might be surprised at the restrictions that might be readily advocated by some of those "strict originalists".
People should be careful with the knee-jerk, uber-strident "original intent" dogma, because, applied to other situations, it could be taken to extremes in ways that conservatives might not anticipate or appreciate.
Bottom line is that I think that the Ted Cruz "birther" issue is not the issue that the anti-Cruz crowd should be hanging their hats on.
Ted Cruz will make a great President, and if the Courts say he's eligible, and the vast majority of the People believe it, then that is pretty definitive.
Ted Cruz was a US citizen at birth. No court in this land, no matter how "originalist" the judge is, will deny Cruz's natural-born status. Bank on it, and then give it a rest...
Not correct. He is ineligible because all of the prominent authorities at the time of the founding who knew the Framers and the Framers themselves made clear their intent as to what the phrase “natural born citizen” meant when they chose to put it in Article II. One who was born after 14 years passed from the time of the adoption of the Constitution who had divided loyalties because of being born outside this country and its possessions or because one or more of this parents, particularly the father, had such ties to another country as to create dual allegiance did not qualify. It has nothing to do with anything said by those whom you disparagingly characterize as Internet observers today; it has everything to with what the Framers meant. It has nothing to do with what Donald J. Trump says today. All he did, in response to an inquiry, was state correctly that there was an issue here which needs to be addressed.
Personally, I don’t think his mother ever filed a CRBA after Ted was born. Any military family born abroad knows this form well. So administratively speaking, Ted may have never been a U.S. Citizen. There’s a reason the only record he’s ever shown is his Canadian Birth Certificate. There is/should be a paper trail for all of this. If he produced it, along with a U.S. Passport, he would go a long way to satisfying a lot of people.
It matters not what Levin says about this, it matters not what Freepers say about this, it matters not what Cruz says about this, it matters not what Trump says about this, it matters not what the media says about this. What matters is what the electorate thinks, and the electorate is concerned.
A quarter of Republicans think he isn’t qualified and a quarter are unsure:
Basically, this means Cruz is toast.
What kind of citizen is Ted Cruz?
I’ve heard of two kinds of citizen naturalized and natural born.
Ted is a citizen from birth, so he he clearly not naturalized.
Is there some kind of non-naturally born citizenship I don’t know about?
Until that is demonstrated the story, and any potential lawsuit is frivolous.
Canada is a possession of the English Crown.
Canada is not "a possession of the English Crown." It is a sovereign, independent country. It is through a voluntary association with the Commonwealth of Nations that the Queen is the head of state of Canada. Any member of the Commonwealth is free to leave.
All the reports I see on the matter say that Trump is considering suing or may sue Cruz. FWIW I think he either knows he doesn’t have a case or he views stoking the embers on this issue as a way to try and destroy Cruz.
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.