Birther alert!
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 ...
Yeah, lol, I made a similar post today but I used my own birther situation to make it.
I was born of a yankee father and southern belle mother in a northern state. I have resided in the south for 2/3s of my life.
Some believe my mother was a traitor, I am at best a transplated bastard and all my kids are transplanted bastards. As are the related offspring in perpetuity because my bloodline on my fathers side is of the people who perpetrated the Northern War of Aggression.
Thankfully there is another opinion that is the majority.
I firmly believe and can justify that belief in multiple ways, that natural born citizenship is both a product of the place born as well as blood in certain happenstance circumstances. I also believe that natural born is not in all circumstances a birthright of place any more than blood is.
I believe this to be the sole reason why it remains to this day, undefined in any concrete way.
Birther alert!
Ahh....how wonderfully refreshing to read a post replete with common sense!
Levin is a fraud.
dons militant insistance that Ted’s Eligibility isn’t.....is just doing him a favor....yep
“I think Cruz is an NBC “
Ted Cruz is a naturalized at birth U.S. citizen by the authority of the Immigration and Naturalized Act of 1952. Arnold Schwarzenegger is a naturalized U.S. citizen, and he is not qualified as a natural born citizen to be eligible for POTUS. Ted Cruz is also a naturalized U.S. citizen, therefore he is also not qualified as a natural born citizen to be eligible for POTUS. Furthermore, Ted Cruz would not have acquired U.S. citizenship at birth if he had been born in 1916 under the same conditions. His mother would have lost her U.S. citizenship when she married a husband with a Cuban citizenship. She would have become a Cuban citizen, and Ted Cruz would have been born with Cuban citizenship, not Canadian, British, or U.S. citizenship. If Ted Cruz was born a natural born citizen, that would not have been possible.
In connection to your tag line....
The foreign-born child of a U.S. citizen mother in 1874 was not a U.S. citizen.
The foreign-born child of a U.S. citizen mother in 1970 may become a U.S. citizen, provided conditions are met.
Exact same circumstances, completely different outcomes.
In 1970 there was a Congressional act which provided the foreign-born children of citizens may become citizens if the terms of the statute are complied with, in 1874 there was not.
To illustrate, a child born to a U.S. citizen mother in 1874 in Oxfordshire, England was not a U.S. citizen. That child is Winston Churchill, he was proclaimed Honorary Citizen of the United States April 9, 1963 (Pub. L. 88-6)
The exact same circumstances as Cruz, the foreign-born child of a U.S. citizen mother, yet Churchill was not a citizen. Why? Because there was no statute to make him one. Mr. Cruz is a naturalized citizen.
Churchill neither lived in nor served in America... if I remember correctly
Which makes no difference.
.
The foreign-born child of a U.S. citizen mother in 1970 is born a US citizen if she is an adult.
There is no question on that.
Destroying the constitutional rule of law doesn’t do the rest of us a favor, as the reluctance to hold the fraud in the WH to the eligibility requirement has shown. If the question were finally resolved by a SCOTUS decision at least history would record the fraudulent nature of allowing Barry Soetoro to occupy the Oval Office.
Terrified? Oh please find another word.
Cruz has provided his Canadian Birth Certificate and his mother's Delaware birth certificate. This establishes his birth to a woman born in the U.S. At this point, we do not know if his mother is still a U.S. citizen or born in the U.S. This is important, because the CRBA requires proof of U.S. citizenship by at least one parent. We also know through news reports that Cruz' parents were eligible to vote in Canadian elections and were listed as Federal electors. So was Ted's mother a U.S. Citizen or Canadian citizen at that time?
Now here are the relevant parts of the CBRA instructions.
A child born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent or parents may acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if certain statutory requirements are met. Parents of a child born abroad to a U.S. citizen or citizens should apply for a CRBA and/or a U.S. passport for the child as soon as possible. Failure to promptly document a child who meets the statutory requirements for acquiring U.S. citizenship at birth may cause problems for the parents and the child when attempting to establish the child's U.S. citizenship and eligibility for the rights and benefits of U.S. citizenship, including entry into the United States. By law, U.S. citizens, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States.
So for Cruz to establish his citizenship and to be living in the U.S. by law, he or his parents needed to apply for and have approved a CRBA and a U.S. passport. Cruz has thus far provided neither. So at the present time, beyond providing his mother's birth certificate, Cruz cannot even prove he is a U.S. citizen. The merits of his NBC status are irrelevant at this point. Cruz has his records sealed and this should concern everyone. Cruz has thus far advanced a legal position of his NBC status that he cannot at the present moment prove. I will note that the CRBA states that a child "may acquire citizenship at birth" which to me is a whole different category than NBC. If you were an NBC there would be no need to "acquire" citizenship.
“No the only person unhinged is Trump, he is terrified of Cruz.”
Wait a minute. He is supposed to doing all this for Hillary.
I know, WhiskeyX, that there are a lot of people who do not and will not agree with my assessment on Cruz.
I also know that they can present a well reasoned and detailed case for their opinion on the matter.
All I am saying is that for me, Ted Cruz is eligible. I am not going to be the person who says Ted, you can’t run. I believe he is loyal to America, loves America, and was born a citizen by virtue of his mom.
That being said, I would very much appreciate an authority clarifying the matter of NBC once and for all, because I do not find this controversy helpful to me as a voter.
I want to know, and I need to know, that the candidates I am considering are not going to be pulled at some later date in such a way that leaves us as voters with no recourse.
When the Constitution was written, there was in it acknowledged two types of citizens. Natural born citizens and citizens.
The process for the naturalization of citizens was addressed and codified.
That establishes that there were three categories of citizens.
Natural born, born, and naturalized.
Cruz meets the second, but not the first.
It is simple.
Mortified
Devastated
Shaking in his boots
Flumixed
Unprepaired
terrified
u you brought him up I didn’t!
> was born a citizen by virtue of his mom.
He was born a citizen by virtue of statute.
“just opinion. Levin gave the Law”
That is just the point, he misled and deceived his audience with falsehoods and misrepresentations. Then he tried to intimidate and marginalize anyone who dared to challenge that misinformation. The question is why, when he does so when he is expert enough to be obligated to know better. It is peculiar to see him attempt to convince people a person/s who are naturalized U.S. citizens are somehow supposed to be converted into the antithesis of a naturalized citizen, the natural born citizen.
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.