Replies

Secondly, by your own standard: “the legislature had the power to specify exactly who, born outside of the country, was to be considered a natural born citizen” Cruz is not eligible. There is no current statute specifying who, born outside the country, is to be considered a natural born citizen. Every statute regarding that class specifies “citizen”.

Bayard said, and Chief Justice Marshall agreed with him, that those who were citizens by birth, INCLUDING AMERICANS BORN OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTRY, AT THE TIME WHEN CONGRESS HAD ALREADY CHANGED THE STATUTE TO SIMPLY SAY, "CITIZEN," were eligible to be President.

Throughout our history, our law has only considered TWO kinds of citizens: "natural born citizens," and persons who went through some kind of naturalization AFTER THEY WERE BORN NON-CITIZENS.

That's the law.

And we've presented enough evidence here for you to UNDERSTAND that that's the law.

There's no rational reason for you to deny it, except that you don't want Ted Cruz and people like him to be eligible to be President.

Aside from that, as far as I can tell, every real legal scholar of any stature in the country considers Cruz eligible.

So everyone with any authority in the matter says Ted Cruz is eligible.

If you don't agree, then sorry, but your opinion really doesn't count for anything.

Cruz is a citizen by statute. A citizen at birth by statute.

Not too long ago your definition of natural born citizen was:

Pretty much anybody born in the country was considered a "natural born" subject or citizen of the country, because they were BORN INTO that country.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3016232/posts?page=151#151

Now your definition has expanded to include birth in foreign countries.

What country was Ted Cruz born into?

Were Rafael Cruz and Eleanor Darragh under the authority of Canada? or the US?

Was Ted Cruz a jus soli citizen of Canada?

According to the law of the land of his birth, Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen of Canada.

According to the law of the land of his mother, Ted Cruz is a naturalized citizen of the US.

Not too long ago your explanation of Article II's grandfather clause was:

The grandfather clause was put in place NOT for the sake of people like George Washington, but for those of foreign birth who had helped in our Revolution. Men like James Wilson and Alexander Hamilton (who was born in the Caribbean, and who probably would've later become President except for the unfortunate fatal duel with Aaron Burr, Vice-President of the United States.)

So the "citizen" grandfathered in were those of foreign birth. Yet now those of foreign birth are "natural born citizens".

And if Jeff can find a deliberate misinterpretation, he will continuously REPEAT that deliberate misinterpretation.

No Jeff, Marshall said he didn't recollect anything in the book with which he disagreed. I likewise pointed out to you that during this time, the only way to be "born a citizen" was to be born "To Citizens" so usage of the term was not a conflict back then. There were no such things as "Dual Citizens" and the Women were always naturalized Americans on marriage to an American Male.

You are simply trying to conflate a lack of specificity to equaling agreeing with your argument, but the History demonstrates that they didn't.

Throughout our history, our law has only considered TWO kinds of citizens: "natural born citizens," and persons who went through some kind of naturalization AFTER THEY WERE BORN NON-CITIZENS.

Nope. They were "naturalized" at birth. The 14th amendment does this, and so does the Citizenship act of 1934. Here, let me show it to you again. It SAYS "Naturalization" right there in the description of it. It says "Bureau of "Naturalization" is the designated authority regarding it."

Do you have one of these Jeff? You know, a document that specifies "Natural born"? I have one that says "naturalization" but do you have one that says what YOU want it to say?

Do You Jeff?