Replies

I am not sure I understand your position on this, so let me use your post as a platform for a response, just not personally to you.

It’s not about citizenship per se. It’s about The eligibility to be president/vice president of the United States, which is that to be eligible, you must be a “natural born citizen”.

You can be a citizen and NOT be a “natural born citizen”.

It is a CONSTITUTIONAL requirement. Immigration laws are passed by Congress. It takes a constitutional amendment to change the constitution. Congress can not legislate away a CONSTITUTIONAL requirement.

ONLY The United States determines U.S. citizenship issues. We don’t care what Canada’s or any other country’s laws say about an American’s citizenship. It has NO bearing.

It doesn’t matter if CANADA said Ted or his mother was a Canadian citizen or not. It has NO EFFECT on their U.S. citizenship. It only matters what the constitution and the laws of the United States say about it.

Does it make ANY sense that a FOREIGN country could mess with your U.S. citizenship? That a foreign country could pass laws that could take away your rights as a U.S. citizen? Of course not.

IGNORE any such talk. It has no relevance and only muddies the citizenship waters.

Let’s use Ted Cruz’s mother as an example. (I believe it has been shown that she WAS a U.S. citizen when Ted was born.)

Just for the sake of argument, let’s say there was a question about her citizenship.

The question wouldn’t be whether she was a CANADIAN citizen, WHO CARES? It is whether she was a UNITED STATES citizen. It is possible to be a dual citizen, many people are. It is NOT a disqualifier to U.S. citizenship in and of itself.

Canada apparently considered Ted a Canadian citizen. We don’t care if they did or not. It’s their country and their laws, they can do what they want.

We ONLY care about the U.S. constitution and U.S. laws. If Ted’s mom was a U.S. citizen when Ted was born, then Ted, according to immigration LAW (not the constitution) is a U.S. citizen. Canada be damned.

BUT...... this DOES NOT make him a natural born U.S. citizen.

The Law of Nations, Book 1, page 212:
The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

IN THIS country by parentS (plural) who ARE citizens.

Being born in a foreign country, to a Cuban citizen father, makes Ted a “natural born” CUBAN citizen. If Canada wants to claim him as well, since he was born on their soil. Maybe that is all they require? (I don’t know about Canadian law and we don’t care anyway).

So at his birth Ted was a Cuban, Canadian, and American citizen.

His U.S. citizenship is not affected by the other countries that claim him.

BUT, we are not talking about that! We are talking about the constitutional REQUIREMENT that to be ELIGIBLE to the office of president (Article II, Section 1, Clause 5) or vice president (Article XII, the last sentence), you MUST be a “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN”. Not just a plain old citizen because your mom was a citizen, but a ...”born in the country, of parentS who are citizens”, citizen.

What difference does it make? The difference is that it is natural law as well as constitutional law. That’s why. The constitution is the SUPREME law of the land. It’s IMPORTANT!

Also, the founders/framers were worried that the power being given to one man, the president, who would be the commander and chief of the army, MUST be someone of undeniable loyalty to only the United States.

In a letter to George Washington, New York 25 July 1787, John Jay addressed this very question and it was adopted into the constitution.

...”Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolved on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

People of the time did not need to define the word “is” because everyone knew what it meant. Now we know, from Bill Clinton, that it actually depends what the meaning of “is” is.

Similarly, people of the time did not need to define the phrase “natural born citizen” because everyone knew what it meant. It was natural law adopted into our constitution. Now, since our education is so lacking that no one is taught about the constitutional requirements to be president.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse, so they say.