Posted on 04/19/2016 7:51:15 AM PDT by OKSooner
Natural Born Citizen = citizen father + citizen mother + born in US (military & diplomats & travelers excluded)
Then there’s Obama = foreign father + citizen mother + born in US (maybe)
Then there is Cruz = foreign father + citizen (maybe) mother + born on foreign soil
Yeah, but did Churchill go through a naturalization procedure? LOL.
My pointing out a stark raving insane verdict affecting all the courts in the land is my way of showing that you cannot expect reasonable or rational decisions from a body that has demonstrated such insanity.
You hate Cruz, I get it.
No, I'm a Cruz supporter. You apparently don't "get it."
If I have a single issue it is strict-constructionism. I, therefore, support Cruz.
I favor strict-constructionism, but I support Cruz because I regard him as the most likely to address most of the problems we will face in getting back to fiscal and social sanity.
I think Trump would probably be good at addressing the Fiscal issues, but I think he would be little better than a democrat at resolving any of the burning social issues or adhering to "strict-constructionism."
It is not necessary to go through a procedure to be naturalized. All of the born children of a Naturalized Alien are also naturalized, (derivative naturalization is what they call it.) but none of them have to go through any sort of procedure.
It is a fallacy to think a procedure is necessary to be naturalized. The only thing required is that congress should say by law that you are naturalized.
They've used this power many times since the "naturalization act of 1790" which is basically the ancestor of all the laws to which we are referring.
I know that. I was just making a joke. Churchill must be an NBC, because he is a citizen, and he didn't go through a naturalization procedure. You and I have seen that argument advanced many times - only two kinds of citizens, and if one didn't go through a naturalization procedure, one has to be the "born" kind.
Sorry. It gets difficult to remember who knows what is what, and who doesn’t. There are too many players for me to keep track of without a program. :)
> It is not necessary to go through a procedure to be naturalized.
That’s right. A procedure is not required any more than a declaration of intent, swearing an oath, or any other condition precedent or subsequent is required.
Those who insist that a procedure is required might want to consider that the procedure required by Pub. L. 82-414 § 301(b) was for the person “to come to the United States prior to attaining the age of twenty-three and to remain there for five years”.
Cruz thinks himself clever, he avoids the word “procedure” and instead uses “proceeding”.
The presence or absence of any procedure, proceeding, oaths, or any other requirement of statute is not the factor which determines naturalization, it is the reliance on statute which indicates naturalization.
I know you know all this. I was just following on to your comment.
Someone in the government certainly knows more about Obama than has been made public. My trust in the US government is just slightly higher than my trust in Putin. Neither discloses anything but self serving info, and whether even what is released is true or not is a matter of speculation.
Trump absolutely has no access to Cruz’ Consular File. He knows no more about the contents than I do, which is squat. And that is by design.
do you know if these court cases for Cruz’s eligibility... did the judges rule that Cruz was eligible to be on the state ballot, or that he was eligible to be President?
because there is a difference... kinda curious about that
IFAIK the issue was ballot access. The dispute, of course, is premised on ineligibility.
(c) A person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has resided in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to birth or such person.
(d) A person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who resided in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to birth or such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
In the case of (d) where only one parent was a citizen of the United States and the other was an alien, the the U.S. citizen parent had to have resided in the United States or its outlying possessions for 10 years, at least 5 of which were after attaining the age of 16 years in order to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
see: http://www.americanlaw.com/citabrd.html
Given that Obama has already opined that Cruz is worse than Trump, I would expect Obama to be spilling any information under his control which he regards as derogatory towards Cruz.
That Obama has not done so implies strongly that there isn't anything he can lay his grubby little fingers on.
I hope that, by “strict constructionism,” you mean “originalism.”
I’m fine with the amendment process. I just don’t think that the “general welfare clause” trumps everything in Article 1, Section 8 and, by extension, the 10th amendment.
The phrase “general welfare” meant “as opposed to particular welfare.” I.e., Congress is not to make laws giving money or goodies to individuals.
Of course, “general welfare” was not intended to mean “whatever anybody thinks is a nice thing to do.”
Of course you are correct. Unfortunately that is not the viewpoint that prevails in our court system, or even among “our” representatives who, of course, had to take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
Because when Churchill was born the law stated that children born abroad were citizens only if the father was a U.S. citizen.
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.