Replies

What did the founders want? Loyalty, or... divided loyalty? How could they prevent that? Could they establish a higher standard for just two positions of leadership in our government? Say- the Commander in Chief, and the individual that might be called upon to assume the role of Commander in Chief? Are you Fogbow-ing? 14 years in country, 35 years of age, and born of citizen parents. Dare I say- a natural born citizen? What? How dare they ask for loyalty and ask for these simple requirements. This particular issue has been run through the ringer for over six years here at FR. I don’t care how many court cases of limited relations you reference. I only care about what the founders intended. Did they intend for lobbying? Did they intend for homosexual marriages? Did they intend for gun grabbing and ammo restrictions? Did they intend for transgenders in the military? Such the F U! Take your filthy carcass back to whence you came you sh!t stirrer.

We are talking about the constitutional requirements for POTUS, not what you want them to be, not what you think they should be, not what you THINK the founders meant, but the hard and fast constitutional requirements for POTUS.

The Constitutional requirements for POTUS are defined by three different sources, and only those three different sources:

1. The Constitution and its amendments
2. Laws passed by Congress
3. Rulings by SCOTUS

No matter how hard you want "natural-born" to be defined constitutionally as requiring 2 citizen parents at birth, as of now, according to the three sources that define the constitutional meaning of "natural-born", 2 citizen parents at birth is not required.

As such, Senator Ted Cruz is constitutionally speaking, a "natural-born" citizen, he is over 35 years old, and therefore, fully eligible to be POTUS.

Now, if you are truly desirous of having your opinion be the actual constitutional definition of "natural-born", you can do one of three things:

1. Get an amendment to the US Constitution passed that defines it according to your definition.
2. Get a new law through the US Congress and signed by a US President that defines it according to your definition
3. Get SCOTUS to rule that your definition is constitutional.

Without going through any of those 3 processes, your opinion is just that, your opinion and it ain't the constitutional definition of "natural-born" no matter how much you want it to be.