Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Steel
And, for a "non-legal" analysis, maybe this line of reasoning will be persausive to those who don't grok case law.

Cruz's issue arises because he was born in Canada, and at birth could have three countries claim him. Canada by natural and positive (act of parliament) law of Canada, the US only by positive (act of Congress) law of the US, and maybe Cuba by operation of positive law of Cuba.

If Cuba had a "citizen of one parent, born abroad" law, similar to the one in that operates in the US does, then Cuba's claim on Cruz was EXACTLY OF THE SAME NATURE as the US's claim, at the time of birth. Is Cruz a NBC of Cuba? Hardly.

Not of the US either.

30 posted on 01/18/2016 4:07:37 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt

Your analysis is spot on. However, the reason why no court will ever take this on, is because to rule on Ted Cruz’s eligibility question would be to rule O ineligible. (Well- considering SCOTUS’s absurd obamacare decision with its tax/individual mandate provision, i suppose the court could theoretically twist themselves into more knots and greenlight his eligibility.)

Due to these treasonous prior actions, or lack thereof, our country is in a catch 22 regarding the rule of law. How does one go about reinstating the rule of law? I hope and pray that it is possible to do so peacefully.

This eligibility issue is a microcosm of the abuses our constitutional republic has suffered.


70 posted on 01/18/2016 6:00:23 AM PST by mills044 (Don't Tread on Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson