Posted on 06/11/2014 11:18:34 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
~~snip~~ (just the facts, ma'am).
But what won't prevent Cruz from becoming president is his place of birth. Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada, while his parents were living there. His father is now an American citizen, but was not at the time; his mother, however, was born in the United States.
Helpfully, the Congressional Research Service gathered all of the information relevant to Cruz's case a few years ago, at the height (nadir?) of Obama birtherism. In short, the Constitution says that the president must be a natural-born citizen. "The weight of scholarly legal and historical opinion appears to support the notion that 'natural born Citizen' means one who is entitled under the Constitution or laws of the United States to U.S. citizenship 'at birth' or 'by birth,' including any child born 'in' the United States, the children of United States citizens born abroad, and those born abroad of one citizen parents who has met U.S. residency requirements," the CRS's Jack Maskell wrote. So in short: Cruz is a citizen; Cruz is not naturalized; therefore Cruz is a natural-born citizen, and in any case his mother is a citizen. You can read the CRS memo at bottom; here's a much longer and more detailed 2011 version.
~~snip~~
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
I think this is what the poster is referring to:
Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by a Child Born Abroad
A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen, is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.) The U.S. citizen parent must be the genetic or the gestational parent and the legal parent of the child under local law at the time and place of the child’s birth to transmit U.S. citizenship.
(emphasis on that sentence is my own, and not in the original)
If you presume Obama's birth certificate is fraudulent, and he was born in Kenya as his own book claimed (but later retracted), his mother would not have met the requirement of five years after the age of 14. I believe she was 18 at the time of his birth.
I might have gotten some of Obama's details wrong. But, the interpretation of the law is straight from the US State department's own web page. There's no need to go back to a newspaper article from the 60's.
Nevertheless, this thread is about Cruz.
This wouldn’t even be an issue if we had won the War of 1812.
I simply said there were indeed many discussion about Ann. I didn't claim to have the answer to the question. See, reading is fun-damental.
Really, you've never seen the theories that the birth announcement was somehow planted in the newspaper for illicit reasons.
Yes I have, and I gave you the most likely reason why.
And I'm sure you consider yourself a renowned constitutional scholar.
No, which is why I have offered no Constitutional analysis. But I did call Jim for you, OK?
What’s your point?
Do you honestly believe that there is even the slightest glimmer of hope that Obama will somehow be removed from office because of his citizenship? Are you really still holding onto this?
Finally, do you think Cruz is constitutionally eligible to be president? YES or NO
Yes, that is the discussions I was refering to.
Thanks because I wasn’t going to spend the time.
LOL!
Yep...
You made your demand in response to his suggestion that Obama's mother may not have passed on citizenship. It wasn't clear to me that you had imposed this prerequisite.
Many questions remain about the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate, even if you don't share them. Evidence of forgery has been submitted, but as far as I know there has been no adjudication of the issue.
Nevertheless, this thread is about Cruz.
It is. But, I don't think it is unreasonable to ask whether the goalposts are being moved because the political football is being kicked by Cruz instead of Obama.
Yes, I realize you in particular aren't moving the goalposts. But, if you were to search for the topic "NaturalBornCitizen", you would find that Obama's eligibility is still being discussed on FR by a number of people.
Go away
That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
As you wish.
The children of foreign diplomats are not born citizens of the United States.
This is by statute and international laws.
The Child of an American Citizen born in a foreign country is born a citizen of the United States.
We can argue why the founders used the term "Natural Born Citizen" until the cows come home. The fact is that the constitution gave Congress the power and authority to determine who will be a citizen at the time of birth (and hence a Natural Born Citizen) and the Law under which Ted Cruz was born granted him American Citizenship at birth.
The 14th Amendment modified all Citizenship statuses and gave Congress the power and authority to pass specific legislation to enforce the provisions of the 14th Amendment. Therefore if an American is born a Citizen in accordance with laws passed by Congress, then that person is a Natural Born Citizen.
These stupid esoteric arguments about the meaning of the word in 1776 have no application because the entire meaning of Citizen was changed with the enactment of the 14th Amendment. There is no more a slave class of people born in the United States who are not considered citizens.
The Supreme Court will NEVER remove or declare Ted Cruz ineligible to be president. So these arguments are not constructive to the cause of Free Republic, but are destructive to the entire conservative movement.
It is long past time you just accpeted the FACT that Ted Cruz is not only eligible to be president, but DESTINED to be president.
Whether one meets such a requirement or not, the requirement itself is set by statute and subject to change by statute.
Whatever "natural born citizen" means in the Constitution it is only subject to change by amendment to the Constitution. The words were ratified prior to any legislation and are not subject to any such legislation.
A similar line of reasoning would apply to the necessity of being 35 years of age. Congress has no power to legislate a change to that requirement.
I agree with that. However, if the mother or father is a German citizen and not an American citizen, then I once again would claim ineligibility for the child to become President.
I don't think that our Founders expected that the "natural born citizen" requirement would eliminate ALL conflicts of loyalty, just those most likely to occur.
Since the words “natural born citizen” are not defined in the constitution itself, then they are subject to definition by Congress, since Congress gets to make all necessary laws to enforce the constitution.
Therefore, children born overseas to a citizen parent are themselves US Citizens.
Again, if only ONE parent is a US citizen, the child is also a citizen by birth. This is by the US Constitution that gave naturalization issues to Congress and gave authority to make necessary laws. This goes back to the earliest laws Congress enacted on the subject, 1790, 95, 03, 15, etc.
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.