“It is settled law that any law made which nullifies or negates part of the Constitution is void”
But the Constitution does not define natural born citizen.
That is only in your fantasies.
So a law defining natural born citizen is NOT negating part of the Constitution, because there is nothing in the Constitution to support your opinions.
” All your arguments push the negating of the term “Natural born Citizen” making it indistinguishable from the term “Citizen” used in the same sentence and elsewhere in the Constitution.”
Well, if you cannot read the Constitution or Supreme Court decisions,
why would I expect you to be able to read what I wrote?
There is a clear difference between
1) A naturalized citizen — which requires being sworn in by a judge who administers the oath of citizenship, after taking a citizenship exam, proving that one can speak English, being tested for communicable diseases, having a background check, applying officially
and typically takes 5-10 years
and
2) A natural born citizen, who is anyone who is automatically a citizen at birth without going through the 5-10 year process of naturalization.
A child who is a citizen at birth is a natural born citizen.
Period.
End of discussion.
Dude you can scream rant rave and pound the table all you want. The fact is Cruz is not getting in. If nobody else Democrats’ Federal judges will ensure hes kicked no matter what you rant on with you opinion of the law.