Replies

I could never understand how no one in the United States had standing to sue regarding Obama and the question of NBC. I remember when the electors were tabulated there was a cry of “Hold On” or “No” or whatever it was, but other voices drown it out when an objection was being made to certify the results. The gavel was struck and the nightmare began.

Quite frankly, I do not see how some sort of expedited case of a judgement as to a particular candidate being NBC. I suppose the courts could say that it is up to the voters to decide...But the Constitution is quite explicit in naming the requirements. Congress has delineated what constitutes a naturalized citizen and perhaps what may be a NBC, but still the waters are murky.

Cruz might very well be NBC. But I wont take the word of a talk show host, nor professor at a University, nor the Candidate himself. I need a declarative decision by our Supreme Court. I may or may not like the answer, but it is way past time for this to be thrashed out.

I am not trying to start another row of he is, he isn’t thread. I am not trying to be a concern troll. I just want an answer and no one here on FR has the constitutional authority to give an answer as definitive as a Supreme Court decision.

I need a declarative decision by our Supreme Court

Given their recent track record what makes you think their decision will have anything to do with the constitution? Constitutionally Congress is the co-equal branch of government charged with certifying a president. If they, knowing all the facts about the elected decide to certify him then he has met the NBC requirement. I think States have the right to determine who can appear on a Ballot but I don't know of any that have an NBC requirement, or that would bother to verify it for the purposes of putting a candidate on the ballot.

Now Democrats would round Freepers up in boxcars if they had the power. They do not give up willingly so I can foresee a scenario of a Rat controlled state trying to keep Cruz off the ballot. I can also see a rat controlled congress refusing to certify him as president should he win the election. Neither of those possibilities will dissuade me from voting for Cruz because I think he is the best candidate.

I just want an answer and no one here on FR has the constitutional authority to give an answer as definitive as a Supreme Court decision.

You trust the same Supreme Court that found a constitutional right to homosexual marriage, to give a final, and sound judgment on the meaning of "natural born citizen"?

Shirley, you jest.

The Framers defined the phrase - just not in the Constitution. You have to read their contemporary writings and letters of the day, to discover that.

I don’t have any authority, but I will give you my opinion.
Natural Born Citizen = person born of mother and father who are both citizens of the United States of America at the time of said persons birth.
Said person MUST be born on the legal soil of any State of United States.
Persons born in Consulates, Territories, Protectorates, or other lands or ships under control of the United States shall be considered citizens, but NOT NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.
Being out of the country is no longer an excuse to any parent for not having their child born on American soil.
With modern transportation any person can be anywhere in the world in 24 hours or less.