Posted on 01/30/2016 11:10:12 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
...
The first thought that comes to mind is that Trump keeps coming back to this attack against Cruz for a couple of reasons. The first is that he cannot make attacks on Cruz's record of standing up for conservative principles the centerpiece of his strategy because that leaves him open to greater scrutiny of his own liberal record...
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Trump is the Kardashian of the GOP, and unfortunately, it’s not an act.
I get that you are annoyed; it is a season full of ups and downs and real frustration. We don’t really know how any of the candidates will stand up under the challenges of the Presidency but we are passionate in wanting the best for our Nation.
The definitions I have furnished are taken from the Constitution, the amendments and the correspondence of the Founders. The Founders “grandfathered” themselves in specifically because they would not have qualified otherwise. Children of diplomats and military are qualified under the existing statutes because they are out of the country in service to America.
We have had no president serving that admitted or was proved to have been born not on American soil unless he was born while his parents were in service to our Nation (John McCain for example).
Barack Hussein Obama is the sole exception to the requirements, since his father of record was not an American citizen, and I do not feel that that precedent should be allowed to continue unchecked. Obama has spent his Presidency disparaging and apologizing for America and has acted repeatedly against America’s interests. His Presidency should be the tolling bell that calls us back to the Constitution and its importance in shaping, defining and protecting America.
God Guns Guts and Donald Trump!!!
I don’t doubt Cruz’s Constitutional knowledge or commitment. But his loyalty ends as I see him being purposefully obtuse to his status as a NBC. He knows he’s not eligible and uses the current controversy as a shield. I am sad that he is not eligible, but someone who truly believes in the Constitution and it’s original meaning, and claims to not see it as some mushy ‘living’ document would be honest about it. This is the single most compelling reason, for me, to not vote for him. I support him in the Senate and believe he belongs on the Supreme Court, but he can’t be POTUS.
Rubio is no more eligible than Cruz. The current POTUS was not eligible either, regardless of his birth certificate controversy, his father was not a citizen.
Whether you like him or not Trump is a NBC. End of story.
Given his record up until about six months ago, none of those go together. But I have to admit it’s kind of catchy..if he deserved it.
Cuban citizens aren’t sovereigns like us citizens are- us sovereignty I believe trumps foreign sovereignty in cases like this I believe- I was responding to the person who made the point Cruz’s father wasn’t a citizen- it doesn’t matter if he wasn’t a citizen- Ted’s mother was- and by sovereign descent, that is all that matters- according to current rulings
I agree that Ted’s father’s citizenship is irrelevant for purposes of finding naturalized US citizenship. But it is relevant for finding whether Ted’s father could claim Cuban citizenship for Ted. He didn’t, but he could have. Ted lost his claim to Cuban citizenship maybe when his parents claimed US citizenship for him, and certainly when his father naturalized as a Canadian.
Cuba determines who will or will not be their citizens by the legal means of their own determination. If they have legally established that a child born outside Cuba to a Cuban parent is a Cuban citizen at birth, then that child is a Cuban citizen. Specific to Cruz, I believe that his father expatriated and that this means Cuba no longer had any legal basis to claim Ted Cruz as a citizen, even if the operation of their citizenship laws would normally have claimed such a child as a citizen. Others may disagree, obviously.
Trump is the Kardashian of the GOP, and unfortunately, it’s not an act.
Well we will agree to disagree on the Colbert/Kardashian comparisons...lol.
Never thought a GOP frontrunner would be so easy to make such comparisons!!!!
[[ But it is relevant for finding whether Ted’s father could claim Cuban citizenship for Ted.]]
I think the courts have weighed in on this stating essentially that a child born to a US citizen- even those born on foreign soil, are the children of a sovereign us citizen-
[[Ted lost his claim to Cuban citizenship maybe when his parents claimed US citizenship for him, ]]
According to current cases, He wasn’t given citizenship by claim but rather by descent-
Technically, the legal term is by acquisition. But regardless of it being by descent, or derivative, or acquisition, what a person has at birth is a claim. In other words, "claim" is a generic umbrella term. It includes claims to US citizenship by descent.
-- I think the courts have weighed in on this stating essentially that a child born to a US citizen- even those born on foreign soil, are the children of a sovereign us citizen --
Read the cases. I have. Some children born abroad of US citizen parent or parents are NOT US citizens.
All of the courts find that a child born abroad is first (or presumed) an alien, and then, if the circumstances of birth meet the requirements set forth in a naturalization statute, a naturalized citizen.
[[Some children born abroad of US citizen parent or parents are NOT US citizens.]]
Yes because certain conditions were not met to meet the requirement of NBC (IE they never abode In the us throughout their life- forfeiting their citizenship
[[All of the courts find that a child born abroad is first (or presumed) an alien]]
That’s not true- I provided links to cases to you before that show they are NBC as distinct from needing to acquire citizenship through an act of naturalization- We spoke of this awhile back in another thread- The cases pointed out that naturalization for NBC is different than naturalization for those who must become citizen through an act- people born of one us citizen do not need this according ot those cases- those born to parent’s who aren’t citizens need to undergo a naturalization process/act
I know your argument is that anytime the word ‘naturalization’ is used, it means an act by statute, and that any time a statute is involved, it invalidates a person from being an NBC- but recent cases seem to refute this
[[Cuba determines who will or will not be their citizens by the legal means of their own determination.]]
Like I told Cdbolt, I believe that it has been found that a child born to a sovereign us citizen is a us citizen unless the parent allows the child to be sent abroad for citizenship in the other parent’s country- in which case I believe the parents would have to renounce their child’s citizenship here-
I may be wrong, but I believe US citizenship status of a parent trumps the foreign parent’s citizenship in another country- until the us citizen agrees to relinquish-
The phrase "naturalization for NBC" is nonsense.
I'm not trying to persuade or educate you, you are beyond that. When we started this recent conversation, it was over Ted's claim to Cuban citizenship, which at the moment of his birth, stood on the same sort of legal ground as his claim to US citizenship.
That may be true under US law but there is another nation’s law that must be considered regarding the citizenship of a child born to one of their own citizens, if that nation determines that such a child is a citizen as a result of being born to one of their own. US law does not “trump” foreign law regarding internationally recognized citizenship. It may be said to do so internally, but externally is another matter.
[[Trump would have been US citizen through his father]]
the point was that people who try to claim Ted isn’t a citizen arbitrarily go back to certain precepts/rules in order to make hte4 case- there are rules at one point which stated that both parents ‘must be natural born citizens’ (pointing all the way back to English law which our laws were based on they claim) (but the funny thing is the people making the claim won’t acknowledge that NBC parents handed down citizenship by descent according to this same regulation in England), then others state only the father needs to be a ‘citizen’ or ‘native citizen’ - then later rules stated the mother was allowed to pass citizenship, and of on and so forth- the fact is that it was left to congress to define the regulations/requirements down through the ages, so those making claims that Ted isn’t eligible, based on the first regulations citing need for both parents being NBC and child born ‘on soil’- then this disqualifies trump as well-
it isn’t nonsense- there has been a distinction made between those who get citizenship by descent, and those who get it through an act because neither parent is a citizen- I didn’t word the phrase quite precisely, but the point I there has been a distinction made in recent cases between who is an NBC and who needs to be naturalized through an act- like I said, I pointed out the cases In the other thread which found that children born abroad to a US citizen were automatically an NBC with no need for an act of naturalization statute/act
You pointed out In the other thread that the CRS report was ‘being naughty’ by overlooking two articles of the rules, but I and others didn’t see the relevance of the ones you cited as they appeared to speak to different issues than the ones being discussed-
There are a great many constitution lawyers who believe NBC applies to a child born of a citizen parent, either on soil or off- and there are a great many who dispute the idea that a declaration by congress amounts to an automatic act which would invalidate a person from presidency run-
[[ I pointed out the cases In the other thread which found that children born abroad to a US citizen were automatically an NBC with no need for an act of naturalization statute/act]]
You counterargument, I believe, was that anything that requires an ‘act’ or requires defining by congress makes it an act, and therefore invalidates NBC- You may be right- but I do believe the SC is finding that NBC is passed by descent in at birth and by birth, and ‘after birth’ needs an act of naturalization regarding citizenship because NBC citizenship hasn’t been automatically passed down via descent as in at birth and by birth
It was left to Congress to set the laws to NATURALIZE. That is all. One main reason was because the various states each had different “naturalization” requirements to become a citizen.
One state might have had a 5 year residency, one a three year for example. A uniform rule needed to be set. Each state still has it’s own rules on when you are a official resident of that particular state and what laws you are under. As a NYer I am SUFFOCATED by state residency law if I want to be a snowbird. UGH.
Anyway, back in the early days our laws were first strict English common law of course, then as the years passed those laws were gradually changed a bit here and there to meet the needs of the young country. Read Binney.
I rely on the words of the learned people of that time period of American history to shape my understanding. NOT modern naturalization law, or how best to fit old English law (really all over the map) into our modern naturalization statutes.
You have done worn out your welcome.
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.