Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: grania
The argument for Cruz stated that laws since the Constitution have changed what is written in the Constitution.

That is an incorrect, misleading and grossly oversimplified position. For example, that has never been my position. MY position has always been to rely on Vattel. Vattel NEVER insisted on Jus Soli. He uses jus soli as an indicia, true; but it is not the essential indicia for Vattel; jus sanguinis is. It is entirely within the sovereign power of the United States Congress to define the indicia it will use to determine - not grant - citizenship at birth, aka natural born citizenship. This power is precisely parallel to the power of legislatures to determine by statute the criteria by which the residency status of citizens shall be determined. And that determination does NOT serve to change the definition of 'resident' as used in the Constitution. The state of Connecticut, for example, is not forever bound to use their 1786 residence criteria just because those were the criteria in effect at the time of the ratification.

47 posted on 02/06/2016 3:09:10 AM PST by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: John Valentine

“It is entirely within the sovereign power of the United States Congress to define the indicia it will use to determine - not grant - citizenship at birth, aka natural born citizenship.”

No, the Constitution and Congress have no power to make any person a natural born citizen. Any person made a citizen by an act of the Constitution and by Congress is by definition a naturalized citizen.


55 posted on 02/06/2016 3:26:18 AM PST by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson