Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: grania

The fact that, as you correctly point out, there has been no definitive resolution to this question underscores it’s difficulty.nif there were a simplistic formula that all the Framers could have agreed upon, we would know about it. The fact is that there was in fact no such consensus ever reached, making the originalist case impossible to make convincingly.

Under these conditions the less restrictive piont of view, the one that is embodied in the statutes.


87 posted on 03/10/2016 4:25:44 PM PST by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]


To: John Valentine
I'm not going do disagree with you. It would've been fine if some judge had said it and made its way to the Supreme Court for clarity.

I'm no longer a Cruzer. But I wouldn't begrudge his running if it were clarified, for Cruz and Rubio and for the future. The crime is that the 'pubs didn't pursue the issue after Obama's first election. The way things are now, it's a slippery slope. What's to stop someone from being President of more than one country if some definition doesn't happen before there are no rules left?

88 posted on 03/10/2016 4:30:36 PM PST by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson