Posted on 02/19/2016 6:36:53 AM PST by Enlightened1
Here is what the Constitution says about who can be president:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The problem is the Constitution doesn't define "natural born Citizen." Neither does any current law. And no one has ever brought a court case to decisively settle the question as a matter of US law.
There are three ways someone can be a US citizen. He can be born in the US (regardless of who his parents are). He can be born outside the US to at least one US citizen parent, as long as certain criteria are met (those criteria are set by federal law and have been changed over time). Or he can immigrate here and then successfully apply for citizenship, a process called naturalization.
Everyone agrees that the first category of people are natural-born citizens. Everyone agrees that the third category of people are not natural-born citizens (regardless of how unfair it might be that immigrants can't be president). But Ted Cruz is in the middle category, and this is where the meaning of "natural born" starts to get fuzzy.
(Excerpt) Read more at vox.com ...
I’m talking about the two types of citizenship. You are born a citizen or you are made one via jumping through naturalization hoops.
The former may be president. The latter may not.
“When I was in school on a military base we were told those of us born overseas were not Constitutionally qualified to be President.”
Concur. Same experience and instruction.
I realize the case of Obama.
However, Crux is different in that HE WAS BORN IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY. He acknowledges that.
Obama ( regardless of what people believe ) insisted that he was born in the USA ( Hawaii ). Whether we believe his birth certificate ( which he produced LOOOONG AFTER he was elected ) is true or fake is another matter.
That’s not bad news at all.
Settle it and drive on.
You’re talking about Nationalists.
You mean “Nationals,” and no, I don’t mean just nationals. Surely you have read the statutes that cover this ground.
“Trump only brought this up to muddy the waters,”
The issue of Cruz’ status re citizenship had been floating around for YEARS before Trump came on the scene. It took a 15-second Google search (ted cruz citizenship problem 2013) to get hundreds of results.
In March 2013 it was being discussed seriously by Forbes.
So you’re being dishonest by attributing the issue to Trump.
As i understand it Cruz was born of a American parent, so done deal for me.
_____________________________________
So Winston Churchill was eligible to be President of America?
Literal meaning? Neither. It.begs the question, regarding th children of children of Americans born outsid3 the county.it makes an assumption. But the BIG assumption is that it is binary.
And since Cruz or any other person born to a US citiz3n outside the US are not naturalized, they are either the other kind of citizen or they are not citizens at all.
That is not a good way. It is an oversimplification that is vulnerable to a nuanced definition of naturalization. That definition does not allow for the rebutal of the "if a person is a citizen at birth they are not naturalized" argument.
The above simplification does not reflect the realization that the person is a citizen at birth because of naturalization laws that declare him/her so. That is why there is a special term for the group of citizens with a natural allegiance at birth, those born in the US to citizen parents. They are American citizens wholly and can be claimed by no other nation.
I never said he was the very first person too mention the issue. But he certainly brought it to the forefront and has been pushing it relentlessly ever since.
This of course after he said it wasn’t an issue. That was before Cruz started gaining on him.
Don’t try to bullsh!t me bro.
“So he only cares about himself and how he can personally benefit from this.”
A bit like Cruz inserting himself into a situation that will (has already) put the country into turmoil, and taking money/time from supporters and donors when he may not even be eligible. “So he only cares about himself and how he can personally benefit from this.”
“Yea we may get rid of Obama and everything he has done would be negated and reversed.”
We can dream, can’t we?
Absolutely!
The explaination is to get the usefull idiots to support the party until control is obtained.
And there are a lot of useful idiots on this site lately.
Trump, Cruz, Rubio and all the rest are relying on the useful idiots for support. After it is over, then its back to business.
The useful idiots CAN NOT understand that their HEROS will not be able to do a dam thing without dealing with the legislature, and that is where the problem is.
Unless maybe we have another Augustus in the making and he suspends the constitution?
The democrats know what the objective is. Not so with the Republicans.
You assume the conclusion. Case law says the opposite of what you do.
The way US law works, is one starts with the constitution. It is a primary reference. If the application of the constitution isn't clear, then one looks to case law, SCOTUS case law also a primary source. There are many SCOTUS cases that say a person born abroad, if they are a citizen (and this includes those "at birth" with no citizenship test, no naturalization ceremony, and no oath), they are a citizen by naturalization.
The framework you are using is made up out of thin air. It is cited by multiple secondary and tertiary authorities, but if you compare what the secondary authority says about the primary authority, you find that the secondary authority is mistaken about what the primary authority actually says.
Fair enough, and I understand the desire to be rid of chrome and sirens and just get something sufficient for the task at hand. Zero drama would be kind of refreshing. My favorite presidents are the ones we forget, because things just rocked along and they left us alone.
“He does if the court accepts that he was actually born in Hawaii, which became a state in 1959.”
When did Canada become a state?
“If by ‘different, you mean he’s a pussy? If you, you were very wrong. He might be calm demeanored, but he didn’t become who he is in medicine by being weak.”
Agreed. There is a streak of ruthlessness and decision in all skilled surgeons. They have to remain calm while cutting living people apart.
“How, exactly, should he do this? “
Release all of his paperwork on how he became a US citizen.
“I never said he was the very first person too mention the issue.”
Even worse, then. Cruz, knowing it’s been an issue, should’ve handled it, cleaned it up, and acquired proper documentation before jumping in.
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.