Posted on 04/15/2015 12:38:59 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
You really need to show me what line in the Constitution you have used to "learn" what the founders meant when you claim that you, and only you, know what the founders meant.
You might want to read this from Harvard Law Review:
http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/
Their conclusion is that Ted Cruz is qualified under the NBC statute.
I’m sure the matter will be litigated, should the senator win the nomination, but if the past is any indication, the courts will let Ted Cruz be president.
[You really need to learn what a natural born citizen is and why the founders used the term.]
It is what it is. TED CRUZ is a natural born American.
He had dual citizenship from both countries from Day 1.
This is so ridiculously settled, but you refuse to listen.
Give it a rest - it was never in doubt (except for the rare bird who knew the worm was hiding under that concrete pad) and it is already settled.
And Obama was a dual cititzen of Indonesia. SO?
If there were any indication that Cruz had any divided allegiance, concern would be founded. Nothing could be further from the truth. He didn’t know or care that he also had Canadian citizenship until a couple of years ago. He immediately renounced it.
i’m aware ... but good luck trying to get even the mouth breathers on the right to follow along with the 2 parent citizen requirement
keep playing into their hands
sorry, i’ll look to supreme court rulings before freeper threads
minor v happersett was one of the first mentions of 2 parents and on soil. the founders explained why they used the term in the federalist papers.
yet now we’re supposed to believe that someone born outside the US is a natural born citizen. that’s just laughable.
the dems will give TCruz all the ink he needs to get the nomination. then they will trip him up and win the presidency on a walk
you are aware he also was a canadian citizen until recently... right?
tough to call yourself a natural born citizen when you’re also a citizen of another country
about as insightful as the comment i was responding to.
the term ‘natural born citizen’ doesn’t require years of study at the seminary to decipher. it was written in plain english.
the founders used the term ‘citizen’ as a requirement for ALL other positions defined in the Constitution. the term ‘natural born citizen’ was only used for ONE position. they did this, as they stated in the federalist papers, as to insure the person assuming the office would not have split allegiances... at least by birth. they also wanted to insure no future king of england could be president of the US
it’s really not that complicated.
a natural born citizen is a citizen naturally ... AS THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVES.
TCruz was at least a US and canadian citizen at birth, both of which he held until recently.
so you’re looking to something spewed from harvard for clarification on a potential gop candidate? that’s hilarious
it’s plainly obvious he’s not eligible. the dems know it and they’ll tell you otherwise as much as you’d like to hear... right up to the point TCruz gets the nomination and they have the SCOTUS swat him down for ineligibility. that would leave the gop scrabbling for a candidate who will have no momentum going into the election.
being born on foreign soil of only one US citizen parent....
yea. not natural born. obviously so.
being born on foreign soil of only one US citizen parent....
Yes, he is the son of a US citizen. Case closed.
yes he did.
which means he was not a natural born citizen of either.
a natural born citizen is a citizen naturally... as there are no alternative.
if your logic was valid, then william & kate could fly to NYC, have a kid, and fly home. the kid would be british and American... and could later become king of england as well as POTUS. this is something the founders expressly wanted to avoid... hence why they used the term ‘natural born citizen’ for that specific position (’citizen’ is the only requirement for all others)
‘settled’ ... you’re right.
it’s plainly obvious that ANYONE not born on US soil (and of 2 US parents) isn’t a natural born citizen. oh sure, they’re a US citizen... but they’re also a citizen of whatever country they were born in... giving the kid alternative citizenship possibilities
the term ‘settled’ is being tossed around so much, i’d swear there are dem operatives on this thread trying to start a montage
blog posts and an article from harvard doesn’t settle anything... unless you’re conceding to the fact that anyone born with multiple citizenships isn’t naturally a US citizen... because they have to choose (like TCruz recently did by dropping his canadian citizenship after decades)
most US citizens are natural born citizens. only those of us that are first generation seem to understand the difference or the significance
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.