Skip to comments.Cue the Ted Cruz birthers… again [Once more with feeling: "Is he a natural born citizen?"]
Posted on 03/23/2015 8:36:35 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Now that Ted Cruz is officially in the Presidential race, you may rest assured that some of the same people who considered it an insult of titanic proportions to even ask to see President Obama’s birth certificate will be kicking off a similar conversation regarding the Texas Senator. Because, you know… he’s a gosh darn foreigner. For the few of you who may have missed it, Cruz was born in Canada. His father was from Cuba but his mother was a US citizen. As our colleague Guy Benson explained over a year ago, this one isn’t even a question.
For the uninitiated, the Texas Senator and conservative stalwart was born in Calgary, Canada — prompting some to insist that he’s not a “natural born citizen” and is therefore ineligible for the presidency. But there are only two types of citizens under the law: Natural born Americans (from birth), and naturalized Americans, who undergo the legal process of becoming a US citizen. Cruz never experienced the latter proceedings because he didn’t need to; his mother was born and raised in Delaware, rendering Cruz an American citizen from the moment of his birth abroad. Meanwhile, Cruz hasn’t even indicated if he has any designs to pursue a White House run — he’s got his hands full in the United States Senate. National Review has more on this preposterous “debate:”
Legal scholars are firm about Cruzs eligibility. Of course hes eligible, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz tells National Review Online. Hes a natural-born, not a naturalized, citizen. Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law and longtime friend of Cruz, agrees, saying the senator was a citizen at birth, and thus a natural-born citizen as opposed to a naturalized citizen, which I understand to mean someone who becomes a citizen after birth. Federal law extends citizenship beyond those granted it by the 14th Amendment: It confers the privilege on all those born outside of the United States whose parents are both citizens, provided one of them has been physically present in the United States for any period of time, as well as all those born outside of the United States to at least one citizen parent who, after the age of 14, has resided in the United States for at least five years. Cruzs mother, who was born and raised in Delaware, meets the latter requirement, so Cruz himself is undoubtedly an American citizen.
This was the same conversation that took place in 2007 and 2008 regarding John McCain. (McCain was born in Panama.) At the time, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama signed on to a simple resolution (along with the rest of the Senate) declaring that Senator McCain was “a natural born citizen” and eligible for the presidency. Given the current, rather toxic climate inside the beltway, I have to wonder if Ted Cruz will be offered the same consideration?
Perhaps a better question, though we’ve kicked this one around here before, is whether or not the Supreme Court will ever rule on this definition once and for all so we can just be done with it. True, we have some federal laws on the books which cover such things and they are frequently referenced when these discussions come up. And there’s absolutely nothing to indicate that this interpretation is any way unconstitutional.
And why would it be? The prevailing wisdom seems to at least have the benefit of sounding reasonable to the layman. Going back to the writing of the Constitution it was recognized that there are only two types of citizens recognized. You are either a citizen at the time of your birth or you become one later by going through the naturalization process. If we have to pick one of these two classes to be “natural born” it seems a rather easy choice.
But, yet again, that answer won’t be “permanent” (for lack of a better word) without the Supremes weighing in on it. And for that to happen, someone would have to challenge it. And that someone would have to have standing to even bring the challenge. You know… the more I think about it, maybe we should just stick with what we have now.
He is as much a NBC of Cuba as he is the U.S.
“That ship has sailed.”
Not only has it sailed, its already in the New World, building colonies, drinking rum and cider, and the people are expanding westward.
That ship is VERY gone indeed.
Cruz is not a NBC
So? How many lower and even Supreme Court decisions do you need to accept that the definition of a NBC is NOT what you, I or the Constitution thought it meant but what the Courts say it is.
Cruz is eligible.
The BIG question for all of the Republican candidates: If elected and given the fact of so much evidence, will you peruse criminal charges against Obama and his regime and resend every thing that Obama has done to include his two Supreme Court appointments while he was in the WH?
“The laws are on his side that he is. Anyone who doubts it, is living in their own fantasy.”
And Cruz actually is a constitutional lawyer. According to Dershowitz one of the brightest he’s ever seen. Not like an Obama EEOC kid pushed along and spit out the other end to a welfare lawyer job, and an adjunct lecturer until he had to surrender his law license.
I'm of the opinion the 2008 elections were engineered to erode the NBC requirement.
The whole issue is also muddied by the easy confusion of anchor-baby style naturalization and citizen by right of birth [NBC].
The NWO-types hate the NBC requirement because inherent and underlying that requirement is the assumption that nationality does matter, and that those born to a country have a greater chance of being loyal to that country than
His executive order on his first day as president, hiding his entire life history, is all the proof I need.
B U M P
That's a lie; those of us who were, were told to
kindly shut up or
wait for the proper time to challenge it or ignored or flatly dismissed.
The flat dismissal BTW is the favorite of the judiciary:
nope, you don't have standing is a convenient way to dodge the issue.
And your reply clearly illustrates why 'precedent' is terrible — just because the law was broken in the past doesn't make it a-ok to break it now.
Devil's advocate: Two wrongs DO make a right?
There are 5 different Citizenship terms used in the United States Constitution. See the first link below.
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.
"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.
Let me repeat...the NBC ship has sailed! Period.
Lib: “Ted Cruz isn’t qualified as a natural born citizen!”
Us: “After the left’s defense of Obama, the proper response to that line of argument is a simple ‘shut up’, or, if you persist, a punch in the mouth.”
As long as his mother was a U.S. citizen and resided in the U.S. for a minimum of five years after her fourteenth birthday before giving birth to him then he most certainly IS a NBC.
But by citing laws (passed by congress) one is relying on Congress’s power to create a uniform rule of naturalization, and if he is naturalized then he is not a NBC.
Which executive order was that?
Citizenship and “natural born” citizenship are not equivalents, but I’ve learned that this point is not worth contending.
Being born on territory of the U.S.A. is a requirement of eligibility to hold the office of President, irrespective of the nationality of one’s mother. My wife, born in the U.S.A., could legally run for and hold the office of President, although her mother never terminated her Norwegian citizenship or tried to become a U.S. citizen.
The prospective candidate’s natural born citizenship is the point; not the citizenship of his/her mother.
That being seemingly terminally incomprehensible to some, I give up.
That's a lie; those of us who were, were told to kindly shut up or wait for the proper time to challenge it or ignored or flatly dismissed.
Now that it's a white conservative in question is the "proper time", right?
Liberals won’t have to question Cruz’s natural-born citizen status. There are enough conservatives willing to do that for them.
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.