Posted on 01/15/2016 5:53:58 PM PST by Enlightened1
People are entitled to their own opinions about what the definition ought to be. But the kind of judge Cruz says he admires and would appoint to the Supreme Court is an "originalist," one who claims to be bound by the narrowly historical meaning of the Constitution's terms at the time of their adoption. To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn't be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and '90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a "natural born" citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn't suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
The point is his father was not a citizen when he was born as required under the 1790 law. Therefore it will be up to the courts to decide this matter. It is far from clear cut.
Pose that question to him, not me.
Congress can only make laws governing naturalization. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4
Natural born citizens don't need a law to make them citizens, only aliens/foreigners do.
So if you have to cite a law as the source of your citizenship you are, because again Congress can only pass naturalization laws, of necessity, a foreigner/alien.
Do you really think that the courts are going to hang their hats on that phrase? No law exists in a vacuum, by doing that they would be saying Women are not equal. Do you think Ruth Buzzy or the Wise Latina or any of the other liberals would exclude women?
No I’m asking you, it’s your post all about being naturalized, I already know he wasn’t because he was born to a American Citizen Abroad, just like my two children were. They did not have to take any oath, they were automatically citizens (Natural Born)
“Do you really think that the courts are going to hang their hats on that phrase?”
Why should that phrase carry anymore or less weight than any other phrase of law. Look at the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution as an example. Bottom line is I don’t think it is clear cut for Cruz. What I think does not matter. It will be up to the judicial system.
We don’t need to guess at the meaning of natural born or depend on the questionable opinions of left wing lawyers like Lawrence Tribe. Natural born is defined by US statutes and includes persons born abroad to US citizens (one or both).
How do you know he wasn't?
Where? Which specific statute does that?
Need some help? TITLE 8 - ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
Now all you have to do is provide the specific section you believe does so.
“The point is his father was not a citizen when he was born as required under the 1790 law” That’s what you cited as the reason he’s ineligible, and what others have pointed to. I submit anyone who relies on that passage as a reason to rule against him, is in denial about the judges on this Supreme Court.
Did you read my post? I know because both of my children did not have to be naturalized to receive their passports, the same as Cruz.
Receiving passports is one thing but running for the President or VP slot is quite another according to the law.
Were you there to witness that Cruz event personally or is anecdotal evidence all you have?
Nope, it’s about how they qualified for the passports, if they had to take a oath then they are not natural born, if they didn’t they they are natural born. You birthers can bluster all you want but until some court rules in the negative, he’s eligible. Unfortunately I think that Trump has muddied the waters enough that Cruz will not win Iowa. That will mean the liberals will win.
The meaning of a NBC can not be changed by statute
The 1790 Act didn't change the meaning, nor did the 1795 Act.
The 1790 Act simply best tells us what was the common definition of an NBC at the time of the founding.
Still need a plaintiff with standing.
They won't. So what part of the Constitution will they cite?
No the 1795 Act tells us that they had mistakenly included nbc in the 1790 Act, that’s why they re-wrote it out. Naturalization does not have anything to do with natural born citizenship.
Until I see something that conflicts, based on my experience with the process he did not need to be naturalized. I will say it would be helpful if he would release his FS-240 (If he was given one). Of course that probably wouldn't satisfy the Birthers.
Just an aside there's no need to resort to smart ass comments.
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.