Posted on 01/09/2016 4:16:21 PM PST by VinL
Donald Trump intensified his criticism of Ted Cruz at two Iowa campaign rallies on Saturday, urging voters to reject the Texas senator by saying his Canadian birth raises serious questions about his eligibility to become president.
"He was born in Canada. I guess his parents voted in Canada," Trump said at an afternoon rally in Clear Lake. "So if you were born in Canada, immediately it's a little bit of a problem."
Trump added: "You cannot put somebody there that's gonna go in ... he's going to be immediately sued."
Earlier Saturday, Trump said at a rally in Ottumwa that Cruz "has to straighten out his problems," a veiled reference to the so-called "birther" issue. But he declined to elaborate further, saying, "We'll discuss that later."
Cruz, however, is a naturally-born U.S. citizen, and most legal experts agree that he is qualified to be commander-in-chief.
But recently, he has had to aggressively push back on questions pushed from Trump about his eligibility for the presidency. He renounced his dual Canadian citizenship in 2014, and on Friday, Cruz's campaign shared with the conservative website Breitbart a copy of his mother's birth certificate showing her born in the United States.
“He can not be a natural born citizen of both, or the clause would not have been put in the Constitution.”
Actually, he can. There was a case in the 1840s involving inheritance, and an English woman who had only lived in the USA for a short time as an infant, but of two British subject parents. The courts found that while she was British, she was also an American NBC and qualified to be President:
“And the constitution itself contains a direct recognition of the subsisting common law principle, in the section which defines the qualification of the President. “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” &c. The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not.”
http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/Lynch_v_Clarke_1844_ocr.pdf
The goal was not to prevent any taint of foreign influence on a person, but to prevent someone from coming from Europe and taking over. They had debated the requirements for becoming a Senator or Representative, and some had wanted to require they be born citizens. In the end, they settled for naturalized with a residency requirement for Congress.
For President, a higher standard was required. No naturalized citizen can become President (except thru the grandfather clause, which died out a long time ago).
The letter from John Jay, which first raised NBC as a possible requirement for the Presidency said:
” Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.” Note the purpose: “to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government”.
Justice Story, writing in the 1830s, said “ It is indispensable, too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States... [T]he general propriety of the exclusion of foreigners, in common cases, will scarcely bedoubted by any sound statesman. It cuts off all chances for ambitious foreigners, who mightotherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the mostserious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe.”
So while naturalized citizens could become members of Congress, the President cannot. But as it was put in Minor:
“Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that
“No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution shall be eligible to the office of President,
and that Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Thus, new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.”
In Elk, 1884, the US Supreme Court said, “This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization.”
There are two ways to become a citizen of the US: birth or naturalization. Those naturalized cannot become President. Those born to it can.
It is an extremely imperfect rule. Hillary Clinton was born in the USA to two citizen parents, as was Bill Ayers and the Rev Wright. There is no certainty that such a person will be loyal.
But there you have it. Naturalized citizens cannot become President, with the goal of preventing foreign influence. Those born citizens can. And it has always been possible for a person to be born a citizen of two countries, since countries have very different rules of citizenship.
The child of a Swiss mother and French father, born in the US while they are students, is a natural born citizen of the USA AND is born a Swiss citizen - so a ‘natural born citizen’ of both. It would then be up to the voters of America to decide if they could trust that person with the Presidency.
Cruz says one thing in court but not always the same thing out of court. He has only won 5 out of 9 cases, I hear. Seems to me he isn’t so brilliant after all.
It does. Trump's mother was born in Scotland to TWO Scottish/British parents. Trump is British alright according to British nationality law.
No you don’t hear anything.You are just trying to throw a monkey wrench in the ring.
Yes, he is showing his true colors. But we should have known.
He’s never disguised his persona but we were just enchanted by someone who was unafraid to speak tough to the press and to Obama. I still am a little.
However, we must recognize that if we put him in office we will have someone with an ego so big it makes Obama look modest.
As long as he follows through with the things he’s promised... stops illegal immigration, improves the economy, builds a wall, etc. I don’t mind his ego.
But even Obama with his ego, and his pen could not get the things done he wanted. All he could do was obstruct and keep us from defending our country ... okay, he did enough to almost destroy us.
Trump seems like a good ole boy unless you cross him or begin to gain on him in the polls.
Listen to Carly if you won’t listen to DT. She is no threat to him
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/fiorina-ted-cruz-canada-birth-odd
I’m beginning to hate this man
I did believe Trump/Cruz was a possibility if Cruz would do it.
I never believed Trump would be anyone’s veep.
But Trump would still offer it if he felt it was to his benefit.
RE: Trump is a democrat.
Just like every RINO Ann Coulter has pushed on us
Can’t you post without being obnoxious?
I can.
The issue was Tribe not saying Cruz was NBC originally and I fail to see how your posts address that. It isn’t on the video nor in your post. I did not hear him say he did. I asked for where you heard that on the video.
It’s not logical to continue to assert that Trump is harping on this issue for honorable reasons.
He’s trying to destroy Cruz.
You don’t. It isn’t there. Cruz says it’s settled law, Tribe says it isn’t.
Is Donald Trump's mother an American citizen under American law, having been naturalized, or is she still a British national, having publicly renounced all claims to other countries' claims upon her?
Answer: She is dead. But, when she was alive she became a naturalized citizen of the United States. This happened in 1942. She also remained a British national since Britain does not recognize any renunciation of nationality other than those made properly to the Home Secretary. Specifically, Britain does not recognize the renunciation of nationality made as part of the US naturalization process.
If you say both, because of British law, then she could never have escaped a claim of dual citizenship.
She could have easily escaped a claim of dual nationality by renouncing her British nationality in the manner and form required by British law.
If that is true, then how can claim Cruz simply renounce his Canadian citizenship and it is OK? It cannot be challenged.
Ted Cruz could have and did renounce his Canadian citizenship in the manner and in the form prescribed by Canadian law - and by doing so Canada has acknowledged and recognized and registered the renunciation according to their law. It's a done deal and who are you to challenge it? I suppose you could if you wanted to, but you would have to do it in Canada since it's their deal, not ours.
There is no question about Trump's NBC status.
None I know of.
It is quite a simple matter really.
Yes it is. That's why your rigid obtuseness on the issue is so perplexing.
Yes and??? That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not he is a natural born citizen.
BTW, you don't "denounce" your citizenship, you "renounce" your citizenship...
Canada is a member of the UK Commonwealth, yet Canadians are CANADIANS and do NOT have UK Citizenship, if their grandparents or farther back were from the UK!
If what you assert is true, then Trump’s mother’s renunciation was of no effect.
Then British nationality law supercedes, or at best, nullifies, American naturalization law.
I don’t think either of us believes that to be true.
I believe Cruz could renounce his Canadian citizenship, just like I believe Trump’s mother could renounce her British citizenship, by affirmative declaration, in accordance with naturalization law.
Otherwise, Trump and his kids and grandkids are all now British nationals, which is absurd.
As for Grayson, he is a nutjob. But he is an indication of what the Clinton and/or DNC camps will do if Ted is the nominee.
Trump’s comments are not going to sway Iowan voters about Ted, but the arc is a longer one, extending to the general election.
The DNC will be relentless, and they will successfully judge shop to make this a litigated issue.
Congress has never settled the issue, and now it may become a factor in this election. The GOP has itself to blame for this.
But Cruz wasn’t born to American parents. his father was a Cuban/Canadian.
Trump supporters should be wary of the extent of dislike people have for him.
I first encountered it during holidays when conservative relatives all gagged at the mention of his name.
It surprised me.
But now I see on a Luntz poll that a worrisome percentage of voters hate Trump so much they would rather have Hillary.
I can’t stand Luntz but the poll was pretty clear.
The only reason I gave Trump support was that I thought he had a better chance of winning. Now, I’m not so sure. Something to think about.
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.