Is Ted Cruz, born in Canada, eligible to run for president?

Angie Drobnic Holan ^ | August 20th, 2013 | Tampa Bay Times

[Kenny Bunk]

The SCOTUS owes me (and you guys) some explaining. Can the Black-Robed BumKissers answer the following:
WTF Is a citizen exactly? Who and what, and what kinds of citizens do we have in the US?
Is José and María's (both illegal aliens) kid, Jesus, born last night in San Diego after the coyote van dropped them off at the General Hospital, a citizen? This must be the only country in the world where he would be! Not to mention Missus Wong's kid, Mao. She flew in to San Francisco on a tourist visa to have the foal last week. Is little Mao a citizen, too?
The welter of Immigration and Naturalization "regulation" and practices: are they just bureaucratic custom, or law?
Shouldn't they be simply wiped out in regard to citizenship and a simple new set of codes be issued?
Can illegal entry into the US be rewarded with citizenship?
What rights do illegal aliens have in the US? Same as me?
Is a fenced border legal? If so, why don't we have one?
Can a sovereign state defend its border with a foreign country if the federal government does not?
Can The POTUS run immigration with executive orders?
How would you define a "Natural Born Citizen."

If you cannot be bothered to review the appeals on these questions, could you at least publicly explain why?

Who, what, why, and how is a citizen? Seems basic .... and yet no one seems to have the whole story.

[SoConPubbie]

The problem with this line of reasoning is that it relies on a naturalization act, such acts are normal legislative acts and if such are allowed to define/redefine/modify the Constitution it defeats the purposes of having a Constitution which constrains the legislature. — Thus, to claim that such acts are applicable is to either destroy the sovereignty of the Constitution or to disqualify him from Natural Born Citizen.

The definition provided for in the Constitution was apparently purposefully left open and undefined.

Without a clear and unambiguous definition, it naturally leaves the door open for it TO BE defined by the legislative process and then ruled upon by the Supreme Court.

[Kackikat]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/08/ted-cruz-always-thought-canadian-birth-didnt-matter/
First sentence:
He said he did not know he was a Canadian citizen....which makes no sense if your birth certificate says you were born in Canada.

NO apology will be made, so BUZZ OFF.

[Cheerio]

"What difference does it make?"



Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL)

According to the report, a voter emailed Senator Mel Martinez asking for the Senator’s input on President Obama’s eligibility. The response was as follows:

Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history,” Martinez responded.

And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of president,” he wrote.

The real story here is that Senator Martinez has no real information on the eligibility of President Obama to be President, and he has absolutely no information that anyone in the House or Senate knows, beyond a guess, that President Obama was born in Hawaii.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

I hope this becomes an issue. I dare the Rats to raise a stink. They'll be sorry they did.

I can hear it now...

Pubs: "Yes...let's talk about eligibility. Can Mr. Obama provide irrefutable proof that he is a US citizen?"

Dems: "Your honor...we object! Irrelevant!"

Judge: "Sorry counselor. You opened the door. It's too late to object if your opponent walks in through it. Overruled!"

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

If Obama who was born in Kenya was eligible and had a foreign bigamist father, I would think that anyone should be eligible

No, not really. It means ONLY that Obama is ineligible and gamed the system with the help of the media.

[SoConPubbie]

NO apology will be made, so BUZZ OFF.

Hey JackAss, do you know how to use the English language?

Here is what you said:

No his father was born in Cuba, and his mother in USA...HOWEVER Cruz was born in Canada, and I do NOT BUY THAT HE DID NOT KNOW HE WASN’T BORN IN USA...that’s absurd, because we use our birth certificate for everything.

If someone lies about anything.....be careful!

You said he stated that he did know he wasn't born in the USA; Senator Cruz stated he did not know he was a Canadian citizen.

Those are two different concepts.

One does not automatically infer the other.

[SoConPubbie]

NO apology will be made, so BUZZ OFF.

Hey JackAss, do you know how to use the English language?

Here is what you said:

No his father was born in Cuba, and his mother in USA...HOWEVER Cruz was born in Canada, and I do NOT BUY THAT HE DID NOT KNOW HE WASN’T BORN IN USA...that’s absurd, because we use our birth certificate for everything.

If someone lies about anything.....be careful!

You said he stated that he did not know he wasn't born in the USA; Senator Cruz stated he did not know he was a Canadian citizen.

Those are two different concepts.

One does not automatically infer the other.

[Cheerio]

Can The POTUS run immigration with executive orders?
I believe what you asked is "Can The POTUS run immigration with executive orders and thereby by-passing Congressional passed LAWS?

UNEQUIVICALLY NO!!



You won't find Article II mentioned in this or other articles I searched. The Administration is tasked ONLY with enforcement of the laws written and passed by Congress (after the President signs). Article II has NOT been given the authority in the US Constitution to write laws (Obozo is writing a EO that in effect nullifies existing LAW on the books. THE CURRENT LAWS MUST BE MODIFIED BY CONGRESS AND PASSED THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCESS AND HE KNOWS THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE AFTER THE NOV 4 ELECTION WAVE.

If he is allowed to pass this and Boner and Turtle take the power of the purse off the table just like Impeachment, the THE GOP IS COMPLICIT IN DESTROYING THE US CONSTITUTION, and Katie bar the door on what other EOs our national clown will issue. The precedent will have been set that freed us from the US Consitution - that nasty document of negative rights /s

Does the Constitution really give Congress power over immigration?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 10 of the Constitution granted power to Congress to “define and punish . . . Offences against the Law of Nations.” I decided to dig more deeply into the eighteenth century legal sources to determine whether that might include authority over immigration. Sure enough, it turns out that during the Founding Era, restrictions over immigration and emigration comprised a well-recognized branch of the “Law of Nations.” In other words, Congress’s power to “define and punish . . . Offenses against the Law of Nations” included authority to “define” immigration rules and “punish” those who violated them. An explanation appears in latest update of my book, The Original Constitution: What It Really Said and Meant .

[CynicalBear]

You may want to check this http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3084490/posts?page=64#64

[Kenny Bunk]

Cheerio, I applaud and thank you for your determination and scholarly interpretation of the law.

However, don't you think we need the boys, girls, and LB's of the SCOTUS to do their jobs for a change? They have sort of taken a legal hiatus; a time-out; on many questions since this strange apparition somehow became POTUS. So, unless your last paycheck was drawn on the SCOTUS account, hold off on your opinion (in which I heartily concur) until they give us the benefit of their Constitutional wisdom. It' s what we pay the S&DOBs for.

[Arthur McGowan]

In the absence of any discussion in the Federalist or anti-Federalist Papers, there really isn’t much to go on. The oft-cited USSC decision (Happerstet?) does not RESTRICT NBC status to a child of citizens. It only says that it has always been undoubted that a child of two citizens is a NBC.

Looking only at the text, the “minimalist” definition of NBC as “citizen at birth” still makes sense. I.e., the distinction between the citizenship requirement for a member of Congress, and the NBC requirement for President is preserved, since a member of Congress can be a naturalized citizen, and a President cannot.

Of course, there is NO EVIDENCE that Obola is a citizen AT ALL. We know his father was a non-citizen, and his mother was too young to transmit citizenship, and that he has never been naturalized. His ONLY chance at citizenship is birth in the U.S., and the only “evidence” of that is a crude, rank forgery.

The party that nominated an ILLEGAL ALIEN and got him elected should be put out of business as a criminal conspiracy.

[OneWingedShark]

The party that nominated an ILLEGAL ALIEN and got him elected should be put out of business as a criminal conspiracy.

Oh, it wasn't just the Democrat party — the Republican party was in on it too.
Just look at their lack of challenge on it, and how they rolled over on the issue; in fact, the person they pushed [McCain] had possible NBC issues himself; that is one reason I think that the 2008 elections were specifically engineered to weaken the Natural Born Citizen requirement — even if they would have lost out on the more unqualified one they would have laid the groundwork for incremental erosion of the requirement.

[Arthur McGowan]

All true. Once the culture becomes rotten enough, there is no one clean enough to point the finger at anyone else.

Our government ceased to be legitimate on January 22, 1973. I mean PUBLICLY, MANIFESTLY illegitimate. It was certainly illegitimate after LBJ murdered JFK. Or when JFK stole the 1960 election.

[ComputerGuy]

stuff it

[Yashcheritsiy]

The problem with this line of reasoning is that it relies on a naturalization act, such acts are normal legislative acts and if such are allowed to define/redefine/modify the Constitution it defeats the purposes of having a Constitution which constrains the legislature. — Thus, to claim that such acts are applicable is to either destroy the sovereignty of the Constitution or to disqualify him from Natural Born Citizen.

Remember, the Constitution doesn't actually define what a "natural born citizen" is, it just basically says that the President has to be one and leave it at that (which I think makes a good argument for seeing what the Founders said was a NBC, but anywise...) Congress' power to regulate immigration and naturalization under Art. I, Sect. 8 is controlling here, and hence, when Congress passes legislation using its implied powers under the necessary and proper clause, that law is what is constitutional (provided it isn't contradicting the Constitution somewhere else).

The problem here isn't that the INA is unconstitutional, but that there seem to be a couple of somewhat different and conflicting definitions on the books.

[golux]

We’ve fact-checked several statements about President Barack Obama’s place of birth and his birth certificate. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, and his mother was a U.S. citizen. His father was Kenyan...."

Phew! For a minute there I thought that the release of a fraudulent COLB indicated the release of a fraudulent COLB. Fortunately the Tampa Bay Times have "fact-checked" the White House's statements by checking them against the white house statements, and everything checks out. Which is good, because that way we're not racist right-wingers for having to ask. Note to Obama: next time destroy your records so you won't have to seal them! Note to Journalists. Well done guys! When a politician tells you not to look into something, real journalists don't look into it!

[Kenny Bunk]

While a Honolulu (is it "AN" Honolulu?) Dog License from the Obama Era has a fightin' chance to be a valid document, a Birth Certificate from that period is on pretty shaky ground to begin with.

Seems that for several generations, Worthy Oriental Gentlefolk of one sort of another have been registering their offspring as "Born in Honolulu" well after the fact. All it required was for a "relative" and a "witness" to go down to a neighborhood office and fill in, pencil OK, a form swearing that little Fungolo was born "at home," with alas, no Dr. present. Home Birth, don't you know? The fact that little Fungolo arrived in a crate from Manila a fortnight ago and is 23 yo, mattered not a jot. Kid gets a BC!

This is the famous longhand "Disappearing Birth Certificate" seen and then unseen by Governor Abercrombie. Well that's the good news. The bad? This may or may not have anything to do with being a "Natural Born Citizen."

There's a big white marble building in DC, in which they look into stuff like this. Unfortunately the staff, consisting of old white guys, an old black guy, and assorted communist lesbians, has been out to lunch since 2007.