THAT IS THE LAW. You are missing the point repeatedly--maybe on purpose. The issue is the definition of NBC and eligibility to be President under the Constitution. The courts have never ruled on what the definition means.
Yes, Cruz received his American citizenship thru his Amcit mother. The US-born children of illegal aliens, green card holders, and tourists receive their American citizenship thru birthright citizenship. The criterion that if you do not require naturalization then you are a NBC means that all of these children are eligible to be President. It is specious and has not been tested in the courts.
Do you believe that the US born children of illegal aliens, tourists, and green card holders are eligible to be President under the Constitution?
Have you read the Tribe/Olson Natural Citizen memo?
As someone who has professional and personal experience with this issue, I would like to see this issue decided sooner rather than later by the courts. It has never been adjudicated.
Every president to date was either a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution in 1789 or born in the United States; of those in the latter group, every president except two (Chester A. Arthur and Barack Obama) had two U.S.-citizen parents.
Two challenges to U.S. Sen. Ted Cruzâs eligibility to serve as president have been filed with the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission, both alleging that Cruz does not meet the requirement that the president must be a natural-born citizen as defined by the constitution.
ruzâs campaign says the question has been answered numerous times, including in a finding earlier this year by two solicitors general â one a Democrat and one a Republican â that Cruz is a natural-born citizen because his mother was a U.S. citizen. As is well known, Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada, while his father was working there for an oil company.
While Cruzâs father is a naturalized citizen, his mother is a natural-born citizen who was born in Delaware.
The New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission issued formal notice on Monday that the challenges to Cruzâs eligibility will be heard on Nov. 24.
There has never been an official challenge specific to Cruzâs eligibility to run for president filed with an adjudicatory body until now, Cruz campaign spokesman Rick Tyler said.
Also schedule to be reviewed by the six-member bipartisan commission that day is a challenge to U.S. Sen. Bernie Sandersâ eligibility to appear on the New Hampshire Democratic primary ballot. A complaint alleging that Sanders is ineligible was filed last week by attorney Andrew Martin of Illinois. The series of hearings are scheduled to begin at 9 a.m.
Christopher Booth of Concord, New Hampshire, and Cameron Elliott of Pennsylvania filed separate challenges to Cruz, arguing that although Cruzâs mother is an American citizen, Cruz is ineligible because he was born in Canada, outside of the jurisdiction of the United States.
Elliott, a self-described progressive activist, pointed out that Cruz is a citizen only by virtue of an act of Congress that allows those born of American citizens but outside of the U.S. to be considered ânatural bornâ citizens. The constitution, however, says that only ânatural bornâ citizens are allowed to serve as president.
A law passed in 1790 said that âchildren of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens.â
Elliott argues that Cruz is not a natural-born citizen as defined by the constitution, but rather as defined by a federal law passed by Congress after the constitution was adopted. That, he argues, makes Cruz ineligible.
Booth is an undeclared Concord resident who has run for numerous state offices, including the U.S. Senate and mayor of Concord.
He makes a similar argument, writing that âthose who are citizens by virtue of an act passed by Congress â that is, laws, statutes, or acts, of naturalization, are naturalized citizens. While (those) who have been born within the jurisdiction of the United States are naturally citizens, natural born citizens, constitutionally, irregardless (sic) of any congressional act.â
Cruzâs campaign had no comment on the challenges. A spokesman said the campaign has no plans to file responses to the paperwork filed by Booth and Mitchell.
âThe commission will conduct the hearing and weâll await its decision,â campaign spokesman Rick Tyler said.
Cruz himself has spoken often on the issue, but not recently, insisting that the question is settled.
Earlier this year, former solicitors general Neal Katyal, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, and Paul Clement, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, wrote in the Harvard Law Review:
âDespite the happenstance of birth across the border, there is no question that Sen. Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a ânatural born citizenâ within the meaning of the Constitution.â
They said Cruzâs situation is similar to those of former presidential candidate U.S. Sen. John McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone; U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater, who was born in Arizona before it became a state, and Michigan Gov. George Romney, who was born in Mexico to U.S. citizens.
"There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle," Clement and Katyal wrote. "The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better."
Several other legal scholars, including Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, have also concluded that Cruz is a natural-born citizen as defined by the constitution, and eligible.
âThe facts are clear,â Cruz said earlier this year. âI was born in Calgary. My parents, as legal matter, my mother is an American citizen by birth. And itâs been federal law for over two centuries that the child of an American citizen born abroad is a citizen by birth, a natural born citizen.â