and vis versa
Nope. Obama’s mother wasn’t old enough at the time of his birth to confer citizenship. You didn’t see that back when this was being discussed?
And your tirade is breaking news how?
Or you could flip it around and say Cruz is a natural born citizen based on the Obama precedent.
No, because Stanley Ann had not lived the requisite number of years after the age of fifteen in the states. I think it is five, and she was 19.
Everyone knows he is eligible. They are trying to take him out. The hardcore trumpees blindly believe everything they think he said.
I just love all the candidates shooting at him at one time. He has the best temperament. 180 degrees from the trumpmeister.
Isn’t that why they said he was born in Hawaii so he would have been born on US soil?
“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!” Actually, not. In order to confer citizenship on her son, Obama’s mother had to be at least 19 yeas old when he was born. She was eighteen. Since his father was not a US citizen, Obama’s claim to eligibility rests entirely on whether he was born in Hawaii.
So, if Cruz is deemed legally to be ineligible, you are good with totally vacating every executive action in the last 7+ years?
Just saying eh?
Saying ignorant things really.
Obama’s mother was too young and outside the country for too long to convey her US citizenship to her child under the law - if her child was born outside the US.
But keep spewing ignorant things... It makes you look really smart and all...
Try and keep up. Obama’s mother did not fulfill the statue’s requirement that she live 5 years in the U.S., over the age of 16. In 1961, she was 19. According to the statute in effect at that time, she could not transfer citizenship to her “son” because his father was citizen of Kenya.
It had nothing to do with where he was born.
Not according to the relevant statutes. Cruz eligible, Obama not. You
You CzDS people are as bad as the TDS people.
The difference is that Obama has a US birth certificate and Cruz doesn’t.
The originalist interpretation of natural born citizen is born in US soil.
Scalia, Thomas, Alito, etc would all strike down a Cruz candidacy. Cruz is counting on the lib judges.
The one for sure born abraod (Cruz) is naturalized.
Taking Obama born in the US, "dual citizen at birth" and "NBC" are mutually exclusive categories. He's not naturalized, but he is not NBC.
Obama’s birth certificate says he was born in Hawaii.
Cruz was born in Canada.
And up until he renounced his Candaian citizenship 15 months ago,
he could have run for political office in Canada.
Now that will blow your mind.
How unenlightened of you.
You are correct, unless Obama was born abroad. That’s because at that time the law for a parent abroad was that they had to have lived in the USA for at least 5 years after they had turned 14. That was basically to prevent children of 18 year olds serving in the military from being citizens. Obama’s mother was only 18 when she had him. Of course if he was born in Hawaii as he claims then that’s a different story.
I don’t think the dems believed that, The only reason they went to all the trouble to claim Obie was born in Hawaii is because they knew that he needed that to be eligible.
Otherwise they wouldn’t have bothered.
That depends,
If he was born in Kenya, Obama’s mother did not meet the requirements to pass citizenship to Obama at the time of his birth according to the laws that were in place at the time Obama was born.
If he was born in Hawaii, then yes, he is an NBC per 14th Amendment enabling jus soli as grounds for citizenship at birth.
a) Based on a French text on Natural Law actually present at the Constitutional Convention in 1789: A "natural born" subject of a sovereign (or citizen of a republic) is one where i) both parents are subjects/citizens at the time of birth; AND ii) the parents are married (bastards are not "natural born" subjects, most likely because parentage is in doubt).
b) As laid out on National Review: a "natural born" citizen is anyone who is a citizen without having to go through the legal process of naturalization. The NR author argues this was understood by the Founders when they gave control of naturalization legislation to the Congress.
Personally, I'm inclined to (a), simply because if Congress had plenary authority over naturalization, it could simply declare in law that all residents of the US (or the world, for that matter) do not need naturalization.
But I tend to think that (b) is really what everyone means by "natural born." The only complication is those born in the US to parents who are not citizens.