Posted on 01/18/2016 5:57:15 PM PST by Enlightened1
For all the arguments that went on for years on this web site, talk radio and many other sites about Obama's eligibility.... If Cruz is eligible because his mom was a U.S. Citizen, then so is Obama because his mom was a U.S. Citizen.... Just saying!
As regards presidential eligibility, the U.S. Supreme Court has used the terms "natural" and "native" interchangeably:
Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Luria v. U.S., 231 U.S. 9, 22 (1913)Naturalized citizens are excluded from the presidency. Native born citizens are citizens by birth who need no naturalization, and thus are "natural born citizens" under the common law and the 14th Amendment. U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S 649, 702 (1898) ("Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization.")
Ambiguous, contradicting? I asked you direct questions, you once again post claptrap about legal terms. In debate terms that call avoiding the question.
Wow you have to go all the way back to 1952 immigration laws! Yeah that is when segregation laws were legal too!
1). There have been a lot of immigration laws since 1952, and many if not all ARE RETROACTIVE. So even if the 1952 law was still the law of the land in August of 1961, then it’s moot. Just like segregation laws.
2). We do not know for sure if the 1952 immigration law was still the exact same in August of 1961? Good luck finding that. I’m sure the congress had reviewed immigration laws too because there were a lot of Europeans coming over after World War II for the next 20 or so years.
Thank you for the link, but that is a WEAK counter point. Laws have changed a lot since 1952.
See post 163.
I was off one year.
Anyway, see post 163.
Obama hasn’t proved he has a US birth certificate. He produced a COLB from Hawaii and a forgery. NEVER have we seen the original microfiche bc they CLAIM Hawaii’s Dept of Vital Statistics is SUPPOSE to have. The only person on the planet that said she saw it was the only fatality of a successful emergency plane landing. So there’s no comparison between Cruz and Obama.
I NEVER SAID THEY DID.
The problem is that your NOT comprehending what was said, they declaring it wrong.
I said -I doubt the Founders thought exceptions had to be made.
Yeah, I agree with that but.............obama was born in kenya, that aint the big deal about him to me. The deal is , what is obama hiding by claiming he was not born in kenya?
He's repeating something I never said.
He's an authority the same way Blackstone is. A legal scholar who observes the operation of law, as the law is set down and enforced by nation states.
The US constitution sets for the law of that nation. It happens to follow the same system that Vattel described, but it does not depend on Vattel for validity. The US constitution is valid on its face. It is the controlling legal authority for all US law.
Under US law, Cruz is a citizen because he has been categorized as such by operation of Act of Congress. He is not a citizen by operation of the constitution, except the constitution, in the 14th amendment, says that those who are naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction of the US are citizens of the US.
I know you reject those statements, but all of them are statements of fact. Settled law, except to the obtuse and those who are ignorant of the law.
Thanks for correcting.
I guess I will have to start digging up the old links and stories from years ago since the Trump supporters are becoming the new wave of Obama defenders.
You seem to consider me a Trump supporter. I am not, at all. I will vote for him over Hillary or Bernie or Joe, but I do not trust him. Honestly, I don’t know who I would vote for were our primary tomorrow (I’m 6th generation), because all the Republican candidates are flawed. As always. It will come down to who I think has the best chance of winning, and I don’t have to decide yet. It may well be Cruz. He did a good job here. I would really like to see him on SCOTUS.
That said, I am one of many FReepers who has followed the “just who is Barry Soetoro?” question since 2007. It’s interesting to see all this coming around again, and it would please me immensely to see Obama’s birth origins dragged into the Cruz (or Rubio or Trump) natural born debate.
So when another poster claims that Obama’s college papers indicated he was foreign born, or when you say the Harvard Law Review bio said he was Kenyan, I know that it’s either misinformation or perhaps, just perhaps, something new has been discovered.
But it hasn’t. The Western Journalism article is mistaken. Perhaps honestly, but wrong. That’s just the old bio from the 1991 publicist pamphlet. It’s telling, but it’s not proof, and it’s old news.
Do you think Obama was not in a position to correct the publicist? That statement, whatever the source, was allowed to be published and there is no evidence of an attend to correct or refute it. Telling, indeed.
But to declare Obama truly eleigible with this unresolved issue, as well as others, out there while declaring Cruz inelelgible is inconsistent.
I am sorry, but since “natural born” was never specifically defined in the Constitutuion, we are left with resorting to “preponderance of evidence” and precedent to resolve these issues.
The collection of evidence in Obama’s situation has many troubling issues. To equate it to Cruz’s situation is sloppy at best and dishonest at worst.
I guess I thought you were a Tumo supporter since you are marching lock-step with them on attacking Cruz on this issue now. Have you even discussed it before Trump stirred the pot?
BTTT
Goodness, yes. I’ve found the natural born discussion fascinating since Obama appeared on the scene years ago, and I’ve also long been aware of Cruz’s background and vulnerability. I am a Texan.
Why would you think I am “marching in lock-step” in attacking Cruz? I’m critical of all of them, and less of him than of most.
I am truly undecided. I agree with Cruz on most issues. My concerns about him are fairly petty: his practiced performances grate on me and come across as insincere, although my brain thinks he means what he says. I’m also concerned about his ability to work with other people; he really is abrasive.
On the other hand, Trump is crude, rude, and I don’t trust him.
Both men are highly accomplished and very, very smart. And they have great kids, both of them. Cruz’s daddy factor offsets the brash persona.
So what’s a voter to do? Watch it all play out.
I’m just on the sidelines enjoying another natural-born discussion and wishing O’s origins would get dragged into it. I’ve been enjoying politics since watching gavel-to-gavel coverage of the Johnson-Kennedy imbroglio as a child during the 1960 convention, so it’s probably too late for me to change the perverse pleasure I get from political drama.
I am not in any way equating the gaping hole in 0’s bio with the technicality re: Cruz’s birth.
Of course Obama could have corrected the publicist’s piece, and one would think he would have, had it not been true.
Back in 1991, perhaps he was proud of his Kenyan birth and had not yet been chosen and groomed for his current position. Those who later so thoroughly “disappeared” all his relevant life records somehow missed this piece, as well as the Indonesian school record that has him listed as Indonesian Muslim under the name Soetoro. Regardless, neither scrap is a legal document. We don’t really even know who the guy is, which makes it, as you correctly point out, completely different from the issue of Cruz’s birth.
While opponents point at Cruz’s dual citizenship, why aren’t the Cruz folks reminding them that our current President was born with British/Kenyan/American citizenship (if you believe his Hawaiian birth narrative) and apparently also subsequently acquired Indonesian citizenship when adopted during his years abroad? We have no proof that 0 is a citizen at all, much less “natural born.”
So, for me, it’s a bigger issue than just where Ted was born. My fondest, yet dim, hope is that 0’s fake b.c. and murky background somehow gets dragged into this.
In all my years on the FR, I don't know if I have had someone miss my point so badly. I was responding to Enlightened1's statement that the Cruz supporters were hypocritical in the Cruz and Obama situation. I laid out the argument for citizenship commonly expressed by the Cruz supporters (and to which I also agree as do most legal scholars) and showed how the theory was consistently applied to arrive at the conclusions that Enlightened1 asserted were hypocritical. Consistent application of that legal theory to the different factual situations led to different conclusions. Hypocrisy would entail different conclusions with essentially the same factual situation. You can disagree with the legal theory that was being applied but it is not logical to conclude that it was hypocritically applied.
What you claim are facts are actually conclusions reached by using a different legal theory.
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.