Nobody says he wasn't, but the Supreme Court was clear that this is NOT natural-born citizenship. Minor v. Happersett said this type of citizenship falls under the naturalization authority of Congress. Second, any time another country's jurisdiction is involved, U.S. courts including the Supreme Court defer to international law or natural law, which is true with the Supreme Court in multiple cases involving citizenship questions. The precedent on natural-born citizenship was established in Minor with an exclusive definition. Cruz's politics have nothing to do with his citizenship. My posts are not trolling. Check my history. I've been very consistent on citing direct Supreme Court authority to back up what I'm saying. I can't make Cruz eligible based on a wishful invention of how I want to define natural-born citizen. Certainly Cruz has a better argument to citizenship than Obama because his father eventually became a U.S. citizen, but this is still not the same thing as natural-born citizenship.
Well, if that’s your final word... bye.
Excellent points, and TRUE, Edge. I’m sorry that so many on our side are so desperate for a conservative “savior” that they will ignore the truth of our Founders intentions and the clear wording of the Constitution regarding the fact that the Founders did NOT WANT ANYONE WITH POTENTIAL DIVIDED LOYALTIES being president.
We are so enamored with Ted Cruz that we are willing to do EXACTLY the same thing the commie Obamatons did in ignoring his ineligibility. Cruz can be a great Senator forever—without term limits, of course, but he IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE PRESIDENCY.
” Minor v. Happersett said this type of citizenship falls under the naturalization authority of Congress. “
I know you’re not here anymore but you need to actually READ Minor v. Happersett. They never said such a thing. They said they weren’t taking up the issue.