Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Triple; BJ1
In the US we impose a very limited restriction on citizens that may have divided loyalty - They just can’t be President.

Do not confuse the issues of your understanding of original intent and the current eligibility of Ted Cruz to be POTUS.

They are two completely separate issues.

There are no US Laws or US Supreme Court rulings that support your position and it is not clearly defined in the US Constitution.

This is your opinion, and as of today, it is not a legally defined term that has been codified into US law.
26 posted on 08/27/2013 11:40:06 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: SoConPubbie

>>This is your opinion, and as of today, it is not a legally defined term that has been codified into US law.<<

I don’t think anything has been codified into US law regarding NBC. The 14th amendment dealt with NBC. From this blog you can read a lot of history on the topic:

http://www.federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined/

The conclusion by the author there indicates place of birth is not relevant. But who the citizenship of the Father was. Of course that predates the 19th amendment. Now that women can vote, I think it’s reasonable to extend that same line of logic to the mother as well. The way I understand the NBC issue is that there is not one universal definition. Not by a long shot. The blog is an interesting read for anyone interested in the history of this topic.


77 posted on 08/27/2013 1:02:53 PM PDT by BJ1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson