GOP debate rules could reignite questions about Cruz birthplace

The Dallas Morning News ^ | May 23, 2015 | Todd J. Gillman

[2ndDivisionVet]

Not surprisingly, the GOP presidential debates announced last week will be open only to candidates who can legally serve as president.

That will make Fox News and CNN the first arbiters of Canada-born Ted Cruz’s eligibility. By putting him on stage, they will implicitly be granting a seal of approval to the only contender born outside the U.S.

The U.S. Constitution says a president has to be a natural-born citizen. Fox and CNN both listed Article II, Section 1 among the requirements for would-be debaters. It’s inconceivable that either network would invoke that requirement to shut out the Texas senator.

But there are only 10 berths at each debate. It’s not so hard to imagine a candidate who doesn’t make the cut heading to court to say, “Hang on a second, that guy isn’t even a natural-born American.”

Cruz aides shrug off the possibility.

“It would be an interesting spectacle, but I don’t think it has anything to do with the legal precedent that’s been set and accepted,” said Rick Tyler...

[RobbyS]

There is a broader political question that needs to be considered. The loyalty of the parents to the United States. Obama’s father was an alien and his mother all but alienated from her country. Obama’s loyalty to this country can be questioned by the lack of any deep emotional ties. The woman he married certainly doesn’t show any deeper loyalty than his mother did. By contrast, Cruz’s father and mother both have lives deeply rooted in this country, as do the immigrant parents of the sentry from Florida. In using the word “natural” the writers of the Constitution were deeply interested that no candidate have conflicting political loyalties. It was wide suspicion about the loyalty of Catholics to the papacy that kept anyone of that faith from being elected president until 1960.

[SoConPubbie]

    Daily Digest Ted Cruz Ping!

    If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
    Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!

    CRUZ or LOSE!

Carson wins early GOP straw poll (Followed by Walker and Cruz at Oklahoma City's SRLC confab)

Ted Cruz: Too Many Republicans are Scared of Gay Marriage/Religious Liberty Debate

FULL INTERVIEW: Ted Cruz talks to Kevin Steele about Hillary Clinton's emails, gay marriage,(trunc)

Cruz for President Announces Wendy Day Michigan State Director

Revealed: Ted Cruz Is Crushing Hillary In This Big Indicator Of Electoral Success

Outlaw Waco Bikers Herald an Incivility That Might Give Way to—GASP!—President Cruz

Sen. Cruz: Trade Promotion Authority Creates a Path for Prosperity

Cruz: Democrats' Devotion to ‘Gay Marriage … Trumps Any Allegiance to Religious Liberty’

Ten reasons to not vote for Senator Ted Cruz (Or 10 more reasons TO vote for him?)

How #TedCruz and #2016 will get you to vote in the next election

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

“Why not give Ted a Hawaiian BC? SO easy to obtain.”

He should apply and get one! It would be hilarious!

[Lumper20]

I’m not very happy with all the illegal Hispanics, add all the Muslims and all the other 3rd world clowns that Ted Kennedy’s Immigration Reform Act of the 60’s has brought here. Kennedy did not like our European heritage. His reform act made it almost impossible for more Europeans to immigrate. The first group I noticed around late 75 in western NE while calling on customers were some Laotians. They were working at a large nursery. I despised Laotians as they were worse then Viets.

[VerySadAmerican]

All he needs is a newspaper clipping announcing his birth and Bill Ego Riley will defend him to the death and call everyone who doubts him dummies.

[BerryDingle]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3289769/posts

[TChad]

I once tried to find a clear, generally-agreed definition of the "natural born" portion of "natural born citizen," and I pretty much failed. There seems to be no consensus that it clearly means "born of a mother and father who were both U.S. citizens," as some Freepers believe and as I would prefer. I strongly doubt that a future U.S. court will retroactively declare that Obama's presidency was not legitimate because his father was Kenyan. Obama's presidency all but guarantees that Cruz's Cuban father will not disqualify Cruz from the office.

You make a good point about the founders' intent to promote candidates with unambiguous loyalty to the United States, but at this point I think we have to rely on the voters to sort that out, because the "natural born" requirement won't help. I hope the voters are up to the job.

[Yaelle]

What would be nice is if she (or Ted, it’s his) released a certified copy from Canada in hard copy form to a willing right of center journalist (if there is one), to contrast with an online faux document like Obama’s.

[RobbyS]

I go by what the First Congress had to say on the subject, and Cruz seems to pass muster by that standard.

[jonrick46]

You hit the nail on the head. Stanley Ann Dunham was too young to confer citizenship to her son.

Nine months before Obama’s birth would be early November 1960, about three to four weeks before Stanley Ann’s 18th birthday on November 29, 1960. In that day, she was so young (17 years-old), that 24 year-old Barack Senior may have been arrested for statutory rape. So, to avoid that possibility, Stanley Ann may have opted to have Barack out of country, in Kenya; while they were asking for the father’s blessing on his bigamous marriage.

[TChad]

What would be nice is if she (or Ted, it’s his)...

Of course Ted should release his long form, and I'm sure he will, but since Ted was born outside the United States, his mother's long form matters too. Obama's citizenship hinges on whether or not he was born in the United States. Cruz's citizenship hinges on whether or not his mother was a U.S. citizen (and for how long) when she gave birth in Canada.

[Spaulding]

Under the law in effect when Obama was born, his 18 year old mother was one year too young to have conveyed her citizenship to her son, IF he was born outside the United States.

Obama's mother's age was moot. His father was an alien. That was the law after September of 1787 and still is. After over twenty five attempts to amend the Constitution, the definition for a natural born citizen has not changed. It is amazing and sad to see so many discarding the Constitution for a man who is both dishonest and ineligible, but who publicly proclaims political positions that please a sector of the electorate. It isn't the first time.

While Cruz claimed he was "as eligible to the presidency as Barack Obama" he was being honest. When he said he was made a natural born citizen by Wong Kim Ark, which quoted and cited Minor v. Happersett, he is either showing ignorance of the law, or lying. Wong was made a citizen, not natural born, having been born on our sovereign soil, but to parents who not citizens. Justice Gray proclaimed that his case was based upon the 14th Amendment, which explicitly does not mention natural born citizens. It is a naturalization amendment based upon Article 1 Section 8, directing Congress "To establish an Uniform Rule for Naturalization."

Support for Cruz, Rubio, Jindal, and previously, Haley, may be a deliberate tactic to divide conservatives, some of whom have actually read The Constitution and perhaps a few of the key cases. Most of those upon whom many depend for legal interpretation have avoided the issue. Mark Levin didn't avoid it, and lied, citing the 1790 Nationality Act from the First Congress. Mark neglected to inform that the Act was entirely rescinded in 1795.

That was the same ploy used by Larry Tribe and Ted Olson in their letter to the Obama-McCaskill-Leahy-Clinton team who co-sponsored Senate Resolution", SR 511 in April 2008, the "Senator John McCain Natural Born Citizen Resolution. Obviously, all of them lawyers, they had no reason to sponsor a Senate Bill if they thought McCain was eligible. Tribe and Olson cited the same bill used by Levin to claim Cruz was a natural born citizen from the 1790 Congress and failed to note that it was erased, and association of foreign born children of citizens and natural born citizenship never again addressed by Congress - because it is a violation of separation of powers. Congress can introduce amendments to the Constitution, but laws passed by Congress cannot amend the Constitution or interpret its articles.

As the discussion gains steam, and providing Cruz gains political traction, Hillary's team will stir the eligibility issue and we may be left with a Jeb Bush, or worse. Hillary has traded our uranium ore, the lives of thousands of soldiers, Christians in Syria and Egypt and Egyptian Muslims who hated the Muslim Brotherhood, one of whose members was her chief of staff, Huma Abeden, for payoffs. It is a protection racket, protecting the Saudi Families, whom we now appear to have abandoned, of which the mafia would be proud.

If "Conservatives" can be divided, isolating those who have read our nation's first law book, Vattel's Law of Nations, and read the uncorrupted cases in which natural born citizenship was explained clearly and unequivocally, but not necessary to the decision - dictum - as in The Venus or Wong Kim Ark, or the cases where it was, Minor v. Happersett - precedent - Perkins v. Elg, and others, the house will be divided. The law in this case is on Hillary's side and she can probably use it without dragging in Obama, who has done his damage with the acquiescence of both parties. This time, if the Supreme Court's progressive majority decides to hear a case they can be Consitutional Originalists. They would have nothing to lose.

[onyx]

PUT THE THOUGHT IN THE MINDS OF VOTERS!


PLEASE MAKE YOUR DONATION TODAY!
PLEASE GO MONTHLY IF YOU POSSIBLY & RELIABLY CAN!!!


You Can Help Drastically Shorten FReepathons by Donating Monthly!
VERY Generous FReeper Sponsors are donating $10 for every New Monthly Donor!
Please Sign Up to Donate Monthly!

[Godebert]

Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution - The 5 Terms Defined & Some Legal Reference to Same

"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.

A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Volume 20 - Use of The Law of Nations by the Constitutional Convention

[octex]

... the only contender born outside the U.S.
****************************
Ummm...

Wasn’t former Gov. Bill Richardson born in Mexico? (I may be “mis-remembering” here)

How about John McCain being born in the Country of Panama; not in the Canal Zone where his father was stationed?

Then, there’s Baraq Obama, whose birth certificate is supposedly under lock and key in Kenya.

[octex]

Dallas Commie News ...
*****************************
Absolutely correct!

I grew up in a family that read the Dallas Times Herald and was a subscriber in another County until the Morning Snooze bought it out. Subscribed to the DMN for about a year and then canceled because of its far left lib spin on everything. The DMN is Dallas’ equivalent of the NYT or LATimes.

[MagnoliaB]

EXACTLY!

[nickcarraway]

Where is the citation for age? All teenage mothers don’t confer citizenship to their children?

[2ndDivisionVet]

[DoodleDawg]

It’s not so hard to imagine a candidate who doesn’t make the cut heading to court to say, “Hang on a second, that guy isn’t even a natural-born American.”

Other than Donald Trump I can't imagine one who would.