Posted on 01/24/2016 2:17:53 PM PST by Isara
Sunday on Fox News Channel’s “MediaBuzz,” while discussing the controversy over if his birth in Canada to an American citizen mother causes him to be not eligible to run for president of the United States, Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz ..... no “actual voters” ask him about the issue.
Cruz said, “We were in the midst of a bus tour, 26 counties in six days, enormous enthusiasm, but from what you look, looking at the media, it was a great field test. We would do, at pretty much every event, a press gaggle -by the way, a lot of other candidates don’t do press gaggles. I take questions all the time. Half to two thirds of the questions from the reporters would be about Donald Trump and the latest attack, the latest Tweet. When you go into the town hall, one county, 7,000 people, in one county we had 700 people. 10% of the county came out. Another town with 600 people, 150 came –”
He continued, “But here’s my point, Howie. When we do town halls and actual voters would ask questions, nobody would ask about the silly birther attack nobody would ask about Donald Trump. They ask about the real problems facing this country. How do we defeat ISIS? How do we stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons? How do we protect our Second Amendment or religious liberty? How do we get more jobs?”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
We're all PAINFULLY aware of your hundreds of posts, libbylu...
Maybe if you made up a "number" key for them and posted the key on your home page, you could save yourself some typing.
For example:
1. Trump is a liberal
2. Trump is a phony
3. Trump will be a dictator
You could just post "3!!!", and everyone could go check your home page until we all memorized the number key.
Sounds just like Hilary trying to duck her Libya invasion and terrorist murders —,-and herleaky state security secret email messages
He’s been asked the question and he usually waives it off, saying that it’s “well settled law” that the child born of a U.S. citizen anywhere in the world is a natural born citizen. He knows that’s a false statement, but he doesn’t appear to care very much.
B. Natural born citizens
Persons considered to be natural-born Canadian citizens can be born either in Canada (with exceptions for foreign diplomatic personnel), or outside Canada if, at the time of birth, one parent is a Canadian citizen. Such a parent cannot be an adoptive one.(5)
CANADIAN CITIZENSHIP ACT AND CURRENT ISSUES, Law and Government Division, Revised August 1998 (BP-445E)
Sorry - should have courtesy PINGed you to #44
We have a winner!
It is true that the ‘Naturalization Act’ statutory conditionalities were met. However, that does not answer your question fully.
First point: Ted Cruz would have been a citizen of the Untied States absent the act due to natural inheritance of nationality from his mother under the theories set forth by Vattel and others that link citizenship to lineage, not to place, despite all the FUD and confusion thrown at this issue over the past eight years.
Second point: It is within the power of the legislatures (and Congress) to define the conditionalities and rules for inclusion in certain classes under certain words that may be found in the Constitution. For example, the Constitution mentions ‘resident’ in several places, but does not define the term. The determination of who is and who is not a ‘resident’ is left to the States generally, and their legislatures set the rules governing that determination by enacting statutes.
Congress is similarly empowered to define the conditionalities that must be met to acquire citizenship by birth, and Congress has done so. Your argument that this is a form of naturalization relies on the fact that the provisions are found in an act with the word nationalization in its title, but that is entirely non-determinative. The statutory requirements for citizenship by birth could just as easily have been found in an act called the “National Sagebrush Preservation Act,” but that would not mean that citizens by birth are therefore ‘sagebrush’.
Bottom line is that there is no cogent, thoughtful, rational, sensible reason to distinguish among citizens by birth; according ‘natural born’ status to some and not to all.
IMHO: When the court settles this...and it will wind up in court or at the very least, in front of Congress as with John McCain, it will be decided on the status of our earliest President and VP candidates. It was custom made for Washington who ran unopposed and his contemporaries.
Exactly-
Concerning the contention made in earlier cases that everyone who is made a citizen only by
federal statute is a “naturalized†citizen (even those who are made citizens at birth by statute), it
may be noted that the common understanding and usage of the terms “naturalized†and
“naturalization,†as well as the precise legal meaning under current federal law, now indicate that
someone who is a citizen “at birth†is not considered to have been “naturalized.â€164 Justice
Breyer, for example, dissenting on other grounds in Miller v. Albright, explained that “this kind of
citizenship,†that is, under “statutes that confer citizenship ‘at birth,’†was not intended to
“involve[ ] ‘naturalization,’†citing current federal law at 8 U.S.C. Section 1101(a)(23).165 The
Supreme Court recently recognized in Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS, that federal law now specifically
defines “naturalization†as the “conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth,â€166
and thus it could be argued that by current definition and understanding in federal law and
jurisprudence, one who is entitled to U.S. citizenship automatically “at birth†or “by birth†could
not be considered to be “naturalized.â€
............................................
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has specifically recognized in a recent
case that one may be a “natural born†citizen of the United Sates in two ways: either by being
born in the United States, or by being born abroad of at least one citizen-parent who has met the
residency requirement. In United States v. Carlos Jesus Marguet-Pillado, a case dealing with the
propriety of an appeal based on requested jury instructions not given, the court stated:
No one disputes that Marguet-Pillado’s requested instruction was “an accurate statement of
the law,†in that it correctly stated the two circumstances in which an individual born in 1968
is a natural born United States citizen: (1) that the person was born in the United States or (2)
born outside the United States to a biologically-related United States citizen parent who met
certain residency requirements.167
.............................
Article II states that “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen at the time of the
Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of the President.†Article II left
to Congress the role of defining citizenship, including citizenship by reason of birth. Rogers
v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815, 828, 91 S.Ct. 1060, 28 L.Ed.2d 499 (1971). Many decades later, the
Fourteenth Amendment set a floor on citizenship, overruled the Dred Scott decision, and
provided that all born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, were citizens by reason of birth (or naturalization proceedings, for that matter). Id. at
829-30, 91 S.Ct. 1060.
At the time of Senator’s McCain’s birth, the pertinent citizenship provision prescribed that
“[a]ny child hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose
father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such child is a citizen of the United States,
is declared to be a citizen of the United States.†Act of May 24, 1934, Pub. L. No. 73-250, 48
Stat. 797. The Supreme Court has interpreted the phrase “out of the limits and jurisdiction of
the United States†in this statute to be the converse of the phrase “in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof,†in the Fourteenth Amendment, and therefore to
encompass all those not granted citizenship directly by the Fourteenth Amendment. [United
States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 687 (1898) ....]
Under this view, Senator McCain was
a citizen at birth. In 1937, to remove any doubt as to persons in Senator McCain’s
circumstances in the Canal Zone, Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. 1403(a), which declared that
persons in Senator McCain’s circumstances are citizens by virtue of their birth, thereby
retroactively rendering Senator McCain a natural born citizen, if he was not one already.
This order finds it highly probable, for the purposes of this motion for provisional relief, that
Senator McCain is a natural born citizen. Plaintiff has not demonstrated the likelihood of
success on the merits necessary to warrant the drastic remedy he seeks. 170
The federal court in Robinson v. Bowen thus implicitly adopted a meaning of the term “natural
born†citizen in the presidential eligibility clause which would include not only the narrow
“common law†meaning (jus soli, being born geographically in the United States without
reference to parental citizenship, as codified in the Fourteenth Amendment), but also the statutory
designation by Congress of one entitled to U.S. citizenship “at birth†or “by birth†even if born
abroad when such citizenship is transmitted from one’s parent or parents (jus sanguinis).
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42097.pdf
Congressional Research Service Report
also not the response by springfield reformer to me concerning the CRS report and why the courts side with the idea that NBC applies both to ‘at birth’ and ‘by birth’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3383127/posts?page=51#51
While the issue ‘hasn’t been definitively settled’ it has been settled enough that SC is finding in favor of ‘by birth’ as NBC
Looks to me like Ted Cruz is about as much a real constitutionalist as John Roberts.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ted-cruz-is-bashing-john-roberts-after-years-of-praising-him-2015-6
Reads to me like judges once again trying to amend the Constitution by judicial fiat. By claiming that you can amend the Constitution by statute.
Would you think this definition to be a peculiar Canadian one that they have adopted by statute - or are they referring to Vattel?
And if this Canadian definition is worth quoting, would not it also be worth adopting?
i.e. “Persons considered to be natural-born United States citizens can be born either in the United States (with exceptions for foreign diplomatic personnel), or outside the United States if, at the time of birth, one parent is a United States citizen.”
?????
Exactly, and in addition he admitted a couple of years ago he was not eligible, now he says he is. Sort of a reply of the TPA.
[[Your argument that this is a form of naturalization relies on the fact that the provisions are found in an act with the word nationalization in its title, but that is entirely non-determinative.]]
Exactly, the SC pretty much defined a distinction between ‘naturalized under ‘at birth and by birth’ and ‘naturalized ‘after birth’ (ie a child born to two non citizens- even if born ‘on soil’ here In the US) The ‘naturalization’ by ‘at birth and by birth’ need no act or statute ceremony, and differ from ‘after birth’ ceremony needed via a statute in order to convey citizenship- at birth and by birth need no ceremony ot convey citizenship it is a birthright- or citizenship by descent
The polls back him up.
You know the rabid crowd doesn’t care about either the constitution, or explanations of it by the people who actually wrote it and later courts, right?
A naturalized citizen is a person who was born an alien, but has lawfully become a citizen of the United States under the U.S. Constitution and laws.
Cruz was born an alien but made a citizen through law (Congress).
"Come on," Jennifer Granholm said while being interviewed, along with Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, by Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday."The discussion was about what's going on in Washington and how it impacts states. At the end of the interview, Wallace asked Granholm about her plans.
"Your two terms are up at the end of this year. Do you have any interest in moving here to Washington and working in the administration?" he asked.
"Are you offering me a job? No, I ..." she said.
"Yes, because I'm a conduit for the Obama White House. Exactly," Wallace joked.
"No, I'm totally focused this year on creating every single job I can until the last moment," Granholm said. "December 31st at midnight is when I'll stop. So I have no idea what I'm going to do next, but I'm not going to run for president. I can tell you that."
Wallace then pointed out that she would be unqualified to run, anyway.
"We should point out Gov. Granholm is a Canadian and cannot run for president," he said.
No, that is exactly the opposite of what Vattel says. Vattel does link citizenship to allegiance and jurisdiction.
The first immigration act was passed by our First Congress in 1790. In chapter III is Vattel’s assertion that citizenship is derived from the father, in that citizenship was prohibited to children whose fathers have never gave intent to permanently reside of the Untied States.
Interestingly in this same act, we also find the clarification of a Natural Born Citizen, as being one “And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been a resident in the United States:”
Residency was defined in that same act as someone under oath declaring that they wished to remain and live in the Untied States.
Cruz was born under the jurisdiction of Canada. His father was under the jurisdiction of Canada. Because his mother was most likely an American citizen at the time he was entitled to become an American citizen by statute but he was not born an American citizen, it had to be adjudged. Furthermore his father had not fulfilled the condition of residency.
Cuba's law made Ted a citizen of Cuba at birth. Ted was born the citizen of three countries. Canada by birth, US by statute, and Cuba by statute.
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.