Posted on 07/21/2013 5:34:04 PM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
Since Canadian born Ted Cruz has emerged on the scene in Washington as a future presidential candidate for 2016, attention has turned to whether he is Constitutionally eligible for Article 2 Section 1, the presidential qualification clause. This is what we know. Ted Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Many say that disqualifies him to be eligible for the presidency. Enter former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm. She was born in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. I came across an interview she did with Fox News's Chris Wallace in February of 2010. During the interview Wallace brought up the fact that since she was born in Canada, she wasn't eligible to be president. Here is the transcript:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/21/transcript-fox-news-sunday-interview-future-gop/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+foxnews%252Fpolitics+%2528Text+-+Politics%2529
"GRANHOLM: No, I’m totally focused this year on creating every single job I can until the last moment. December 31st at midnight is when I’ll stop. So I have no idea what I’m going to do next, but I’m not going to run for president. I can tell you that.
WALLACE: Yes, that’s true. We should point out Governor Granholm is a Canadian and cannot run for president.
GRANHOLM: I’m American. I’ve got dual citizenship.”
With that said, I went to the biography of Jennifer Granholm and found that she was born to one American citizen and is indeed a dual Citizen who became 'NATURALIZED' as a U.S. Citizen in 1980 at the age of 21. Now this raises a question. How can a naturalized U.S. Citizen become president of the United States?
Continued below.
>> I’m appalled at the ‘ends justify the means’ being shown here.
If Cruz is a legal candidate for POTUS, the ‘ends’ are irrelevant. Are you appalled by irrelevancy or are you implying Cruz is not eligible?
Sen. Ted Cruz rejected questions Sunday over his eligibility to be president, saying that although he was born in Canada “the facts are clear” that he’s a U.S. citizen. “My mother was born in Wilmington, Delaware. She’s a U.S. citizen, so I’m a U.S. citizen by birth,” Cruz told ABC. “I’m not going to engage in a legal debate.” The Texas senator was born in Calgary, .......
“I can tell you where I was born and who my parents were. And then as a legal matter, others can worry about that. I’m not going to engage,” Cruz said in the interview with “This Week” on ABC.
If a legal immigrant father makes a person eligible for POTUSA than the two sons of deposed Egyptian Muslim President Morsi are also eligible for POTUSA who were born in the USA. I don’t think the Founders intended to form a Nation with that possibility.
Just because YOU say that doesn’t mean it’s the case. Congress decides on the laws of who’s a citizen and who’s not, and they don’t agree with you.
Cruz is a naturalized citizen, 8 U.S.C. § 1401(g).
Let the Secretaries of the several States decide it. They were down with zero. If they aren’t down with Cruz, they’ll have to explain it.
Out of this fight we will get settled NBC law.
Ok thanks. I would appreciate it.
I think the Constitution as original by the Founder and/or subsequent amendments is what established(s) the form of citizenship. Congress has no authority to abrogate what is specifically specified in the Constitution.
He is not. He already said he is eligible. Most people agree with him.
"In Gray’s majority opinion for Wong Kim Ark, Gray makes two references to natural born citizen which directly conflict with his British common law approach. The first is a reference to Justice Waite’s opinion from Minor vs. Happersett[6], in which Waite refers to a Vattel’s definition of natural born citizen as birth to two citizen parents on country’s soil[10].
In the second, Justice Gray quotes from a pamphlet entitled “Alienigenae of the United States”, by Horace Binney, which used the term "natural born" in connection with a child of a citizen, but not in connection with a child of an alien parent. :The right of citizenship never descends in the legal sense, either by the common law or under the common naturalization acts. It is incident to birth in the country, or it is given personally by statute. The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle. (Binney’s statement, as cited by Gray U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)[11])
While Binney references both children as citizens, only the child born of a citizen is referenced as "natural born". Justice Gray’s articulation of British Common Law in Wong Kim Ark regarding U.S. citizenship should be considered nothing short of an abomination, because it is truly runs contrary to the very origins and hard-won principles of this country.
While Gray’s argument in Wong Kim Ark has had deleterious effect on citizenship, the case did not affect natural born citizen because Gray never pronounced that a natural born citizen was equivalent to a natural born Subject, despite obviously desiring to do so, and Gray never at all undermined 6 the definition provided by Justice Waite from Minor vs. Happersett. While Wong Kim Ark was pronounced a citizen of the United States, Ark was never declared to be a natural born citizen of the United States.
Well of course it has been discussed extensively. So what? Nothing has been decided here. Extensive discussion does not prove your point or anyone elses. According to more than a few long time FReepers, he is not elgible. To more than a few, he is elgible. So how is it going to be decided? Just because you think he is good to go, or someone else says no, does not mean squat. Who knows what the Surpreme Court might decide if it went there. You don’t. Neither does anyone else here. I’d hope he is eligble, I want to vote for Sarah with Ted as VP. This could well be the last time I vote for a President of The United States of America and I would like my vote to go to Sarah!! We will see I suppose.
Domo. I’m still working on the Cruz thread, but I’ll get to this one after a bit.
” He already said he is eligible.”
Really? Give me a link to an official statement by Cruz stating he is eligible for the presidency?
The way you get on the President check box on the ballot is by filing with the Secretaries of (all) State(s). Prior to Obama, nobody needed scrutiny.
If Cruz wants to run, he has the same procedure. If any State objects, they will have to explain why.
If no States do, then there is no settled Natural Born Citizen law. If they do, there will be eventually a SCOTUS ruling on NBC.
” He already said he is eligible.”
Really? Give me a link to an official statement by Cruz stating he is eligible for the presidency?
Interesting find! I tried pinging you earlier but couldn’t remember how to spell your name. It’s FlotSAM not Flotsome. I’ll try to remember.
From the wild and crazy thread:
Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:40:21 AM · 164 of 509
winodog to Hostage
I was in Ramstein in 64. Second grade and I recall being “drilled” about being a NBC if we were born on base.
Our brothers and sisters would be eligible to be President of the USA. There was a difference and it was a very important distinction.
I recall very little from then but have always remembered that fact. In order to be P you must be born on US soil and BOTH your parents had to be US citizens.
I am not a rat operative and Cruz’ eligibility or lack thereof, should he want to run for president, is a concern.
I am not a noob and not a dem.
If a legal immigrant father makes a person eligible for POTUSA than the two sons of deposed Egyptian Muslim President Morsi are also eligible for POTUSA who were born in the USA. I don’t think the Founders intended to form a Nation with that possibility.
Very good point.
You’re saying people concerned about Cruz’ NBC status are RACISTS?
You’ve got to be insane.
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.