Posted on 01/16/2016 12:34:18 AM PST by RC one
The Founding Fathers’ insistence that the presidency be limited to “natural born citizens†was based on their openly expressed fear that “foreigners were disloyal,†as law professor Malinda L. Seymore has written.
As Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution declared: “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President ….†(Italics added) A loophole for themselves, as Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote 46 years later, was created “out of respect to those distinguished revolutionary patriots, who were born in a foreign land, and yet had entitled themselves to high honours in their adopted country. A positive exclusion of them from the office would have been unjust to their merits, and painful to their sensibilities.â€
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I think it helps to reinforce the language of Art IV, Sec. 2. Doing so eases the concerns that many have about the effect of "accidental" birth abroad and even birth abroad to military duty servicemen (and women).
Cruz was not born a citizen of one of the several states.
True that.
It matters not that in Vattel’s day patrilineage was the rule. It is no longer. You may have heard of the 14th Amendment. It changed the Constitution and made patrilineage unconstitutional.
As a result you can no longer take Vattel’s reference to ‘fathers’ as literally as you could have if you were born in 1740.
Please join us in the late 19th century, at least.
BTW, there is ample evidence that the Founders accepted the primacy of jus sanguinis. Your insistence on jus solis is the kind of bad thinking that gave us anchor babies. Thanks a lot.
You oughtta know. I guess you are as unfamiliar with the concept of unintended irony as you are with the concept of natural born citizenship.
So? ??? !!??? What's your point?
I have already clearly demonstrated that Jus Soli is at least the minimum standard by which natural born citizenship is determined. this is easily discerned from article II, section I, clause 5 and the reality of it is fully supported by historical records. If Ted Cruz can’t even meet the minimum standard, there’s no need to even discuss the stricter standard.
In Colonial Days, the Brits were equally concerned with national loyalties. My Swiss forebears arrived in Philadelphia on the ship “Friendship”, Captain John Thompson, out of Rotterdam, on November 9, 1750.
Being Germanic peoples, their first requirement was to be marched to City Hall and “Certified”. This entailed disavowing any Germanic allegiances and swearing allegiance to King George III.
Shortly after the above Certification, Grandpa Hans was granted Warrant Rights to 50 acres of land in York Township, York County, PA, by the Penns. And they all lived happily ever after.
Sorry, but you have demonstrated no such thing. You have expounded on your opinion, that's all.
The hell I haven’t.
Our worst presidents fit your description of NBC. Didn’t stop them from being the worst presidents or holding allegiances to foreign nations.
Sorry, but you have failed at the task you set for yourself and just can’t bring yourself to admit it.
Yes. Obama is not natural-born because his father was not a citizen. It matters not that he was born in America. The fact that he holds no special love for our country is proof that the Founders were smart for including a provision that you had to be BORN on the soil of TWO parents who were citizens. This special circumstance of pure citizenship avoids the problem of presidents who are less than 100% patriotic.
Cruz might be qualified in spirit, he is NOT qualified in fact.
Got your blinder secured tightly I see.
I'm going to retreat to my safe space.
Yes. Reprint from me...
The first 8 where “grandfathered in†by the Constitution BECAUSE the country was at its nexus. But of course the Framers wanted PURE citizens to be presidents afterwards. They DIDN’T say “only citizens†can be president, they said “only special citizens†can be president. There is NOTHING special about Cruz’s citizenship. Special citizenship was understood to be pure, unassailable, unquestionable, and NON-foreign. The FACT that Cruz’s eligibility is be questioned points to the OBVIOUSNESS of its inferiority to others. There are millions of natural born citizens in the country. Obama is not one, Cruz is not one, Rubio is not one. All of my life it was COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD that to be president you had to be born in AMERICA. Why have we walked this back? Why the desire to challenge the wisdom of the Founders? It is mind-boggling.
It’s beyond alarming. I have been smelling something coming out of Washington for a while now and I didn’t want to say what it was but it smells like surrender of some sort.
Same standard:
In 1936, Trump married Scottish immigrant Mary Anne MacLeod (born May 10, 1912, Stornoway, Scotland...
Trumps mother became a naturalized citizen before his birth.
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.