Question Ted Cruz should ask: Can a foreign-born American be president?

The Los Angeles Times ^ | February 24, 2015 | Doyle McManus

[2ndDivisionVet]

Sen. Ted Cruz is getting close to announcing his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination. The Texan is spending almost as much time in Iowa and New Hampshire as he does on Fox News; he's hired a staff and collected a long list of fiercely conservative supporters..

There's at least one hitch: Ted Cruz was born in Calgary, in the Canadian province of Alberta. His mother was a U.S. citizen, born in Delaware; his father, a Cuban refugee working in Canada's oil fields. Thanks to his mother, Cruz was a U.S. citizen at birth.

But that doesn't clear up a legal muddle that's as old as the Constitution: Is a U.S. citizen born abroad qualified to serve as president?

I don't agree with Cruz on most issues. He wants to repeal Obamacare, abolish the Internal Revenue Service and pass a constitutional amendment allowing states to outlaw gay marriage, just to take the top of his list. But I still hope he runs — because it's high time we established the right of Canadian-born Americans to serve as president.

Canadian Americans are perhaps our most underappreciated minority. Their contributions to U.S. culture range from hockey to comedy to, well, hockey. It's an impressive list: Wayne Gretzky, William Shatner, Lorne Michaels, Jim Carrey, Pamela Anderson, Alex Trebek. And now Ted Cruz.

At this point I should confess a personal stake: My oldest daughter was born in Toronto. Like Ted Cruz, she inherited U.S. citizenship through one of her parents. But we assured her that she could grow up to be president of the United States. (Proud of her dual citizenship, she says she'd like to serve as prime minister of Canada too.)

Canada is a wonderful country.....

[Arthur McGowan]

ARAIK, the USSC has never decided anything with respect to Obama’s citizenship. The USSC and lower courts have decided nothing except to deny that any plaintiff has standing.

This is why I want Cruz to arrest Obama and his accomplices and try them for treason and fraud in putting a non-citizen in the Presidency.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Every US military post in any country is considered American soil

That's a common misconception. U.S. military installations abroad are not considered U.S. soil for the purposes of citizenship. The following text is from the State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual.

7 FAM 1113 NOT INCLUDED IN THE MEANING OF “IN THE UNITED STATES”

c. Birth on U.S. Military Base Outside of the United States or Birth on U.S. Embassy or Consulate Premises Abroad:

(1) Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.”

Additionally, acquiring one's citizenship at birth by statute may not be equal to natural-born citizenship under the Constitution. The following text is also from the State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual.

7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency

(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)

a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.

d. (snip) In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.

That said, I'm all for a Cruz presidency. His bodily waste is more American than Obama could ever hope to be.

[BuckeyeTexan]

48 hours straight, hmm. Sounds like he and someone else wee tag teaming on one handle.

Or maybe suckin' down a few mugs of a certain someone's coffee. Just sayin'. ;)

[EDINVA]

There’s a difference between being born overseas while your parent(s) are in the “service of your country” as military or foreign service personnel, and working for a company in the oil fields, or other employ that is not ‘in service of your country.” The former exception was always understood and waived.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Very interesting thread. Thank you, darlin’.

[Nero Germanicus]

There were many lawsuits that were not decided on the basis of lack of standing. The most well-known were the trials on the merits in New Jersey and in Georgia.
Standing was indeed an obstacle, primarily in the 2008 election cycle because the people who had standing under Article III of the Constitution, most notably John McCain and then in 2012, Mitt Romney decided not to file suit; not to enter an existing legal challenge as a co-plaintiff; or even to submit an amicus brief in support of any legal challenge.
Also, there are no issues of standing to get in the way of a CRIMINAL investigation for forgery, identity theft, fraud, document tampering or election fraud and yet there has never been a formal criminal investigation in any jurisdiction.

The New Jersey trial (which can be watched on YouTube): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l49PTOtnQvg was Purpura and Moran v Obama; and the Georgia trial on the merits (which excerpts from can be seen on YouTube:) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yg1r8tWOT3c was Farrar, Powell, Swensson & Welden v Obama.

Altogether there have been 220 original jurisdiction lawsuits, 97 state and federal appellate court rulings and 26 applications and petitions at the Supreme Court of the United States. That’s 343 attempts and zero successes.
With seven and nine judge state and federal Supreme Courts, three judge state and federal appellate court panels and 220 trial courts, close to a thousand judges have looked at Obama’s eligibility without a single judge finding him to be ineligible.

[Darksheare]

I swear I have not experimented on anyone in such fashion yet.

[stephenjohnbanker]

““...branded and suspendered.””

LOL....good one, Darks!

[BuckeyeTexan]

It boggles the mind how so many judges just could not acknowledge the supremely gifted legal mind of Orly Taitz, Esq., doesn’t it?

;)

[BuckeyeTexan]

Clearly, someone was experimenting without guidance.

[Darksheare]

Did not consult their physician to see if Coughee brand coffee was right for them.

[Darksheare]

Thanks!

[Nero Germanicus]

A Reagan-appointed judge said in his ruling when Orly Taitz sued President Bush’s Commissioner of the Social Security Administration over Obama’s Social Security number: “Ever persistent, plaintiff has once again come before this Court in an effort to uncover ‘the biggest cover up in the history of this nation.’
She believes that the President is using a ‘fraudulently obtained’ social security number and that the Social Security Administration—among other agencies—is involved in a scheme to ‘cover up social security fraud, IRS fraud, elections fraud and possibly treason’ committed by the President.

As her numerous filings with the Court demonstrate, plaintiff will stop at nothing to get to the bottom of this alleged conspiracy. Unfortunately for plaintiff, today is not her lucky day.”—Chief U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Taitz v Astrue

[TexasVoter]

Anwar al-Awlaki was born in 1971 to Yemeni citizens in Las Cruces, New Mexico. US Intelligence reports that, from the age of seven, al-Awlaki was raised abroad, becoming an enemy of America, indoctrinated by the highest powers of Al-Qaida and studying under the same teachers as Osama bin Laden. He eventually influenced various terrorists such as the Fort Hood shooter, Nidal Malik Hasan, and helped plan the thwarted attack of the “Underwear Bomber,” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Al-Awlaki’s phone number was found among the contact information of Ramzi bin al-Shibh, the man known as “the 20th hijacker” in the 9/11 attacks.

Those who suggest that there is no distinction between “citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” would have us believe and accept that such a person might have been eligible to run for President of the US simply because he was born in America. According to defenders of the alleged eligibility of Barack Obama (or Marco Rubio, or Bobby Jindal), any person born on US soil to one or more alien citizens could be the leader of the free world. At some point, according to that path of logic, this should have included Anwar al-Awlaki.

So, to say that every person born a US citizen is also a natural born citizen is also to say that any foreign interest whose child was born in the US could be allowed to raise that child abroad as an enemy of the US and return that child to this country in time to meet the Constitution’s 14-year residency requirement for President.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Citizen or naturalized citizen. That’s it.

[Nero Germanicus]

There is a real life example which is better than a hypothetical.

In 2004, Róger Calero, who was born in Nicaragua and is a naturalized U.S. citizen was the Socialist Worker Party candidate for President of the United States and received 3,689 votes.

Because he is not a natural born citizen of the United States, Calero is ineligible to become U.S. president under the United States Constitution, meaning that even had he won the election, he would not have been permitted to serve.

James Harris, the Socialist Workers’ Party presidential candidate from 2000, stood in on the ticket in nine states where Calero could not be listed on the ballot and Harris received 7,102 votes.

Róger Calero again ran for President in the 2008 presidential election and again, James Harris stood in for Calero in several states where not being a natural born citizen prevented him from even being listed on the ballot. In the 2008 presidential election, Calero was allowed on the ballot in five states, where he received 7,209 votes and James Harris received 2,424 votes in five states where he was on the ballot in place of Calero.

Since the courts have ruled that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen, the point is moot as to whether there is a difference between a “citizen” and a “natural born citizen.”
The courts have consistently ruled since the 19th century that anyone who qualifies as a “Citizen of the United States At Birth” is also a “natural born citizen.”

[Puzo1]

It does not matter how many pro-President Obama citations you provide for us. In the small amount of cases in which the court reached the merits of the definition of natural born citizen, each judge simply relied upon the previous judge who relied upon the Fourteenth Amendment and U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), neither of which define a natural born citizen any differently than does Minor v. Happersett (1875), i.e., a child born in a country to parents who were its citizens at the time of the child’s birth. In other words, reliance upon the Fourteenth Amendment and Wong Kim Ark to hold that Obama is an Article II natural born citizen is misplaced. Also, the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to give us a decision on whether Obama is a natural born citizen.

[Nero Germanicus]

You have a very firm grasp on the obvious. It is true that “stare decisis” remains the norm in American jurisprudence but any Trier of Fact is perfectly capable of rejecting precedent and heading in a different direction.
Aside from court rulings, in some states, state elections boards composed of elected officials and/or appointed citizens also have had a chance to review these issues of eligibility and natural born citizenship under Article II, Section 1. None of those state Elections Boards have ruled any differently from judges. [e.g. New York Board of Elections, Alaska Division of Elections, Illinois Board of Elections, Indiana Election Commission, or Kansas Board of Elections, et. cetera]

Minor v Happersett: “The Constitution DOES NOT SAY IN WORDS who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to determine that.”

And jumping ahead 138 years:
Allen v Obama, Arizona Superior Court Judge Richard E. Gordon: “Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”—Pima County Superior Court, Tuscon, Arizona, March 7, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/84531299/AZ-2012-03-07-Allen-v-Obama-C20121317-ORDER-Dismissing-Complaint

[BuckeyeTexan]

The courts have consistently ruled since the 19th century that anyone who qualifies as a “Citizen of the United States At Birth” is also a “natural born citizen.”

That is true for 14A citizens at birth. For everyone else, the issue remains unresolved per the State Department.

7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency

(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)

d. (snip) In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.

[BuckeyeTexan]

My favorite one was the reference to Don Quixote.