Posted on 03/26/2013 7:02:12 PM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
42-year-old Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, to an American mother and a Cuban father. By dint of his mother’s citizenship, Cruz was an American citizen at birth. Whether he meets the Constitution’s requirement that the president of the United States be a “natural-born citizen,” a term the Framers didn’t define and for which the nation’s courts have yet to offer an interpretation, has become the subject of considerable speculation.
Snip~
Legal scholars are firm about Cruz’s eligibility. “Of course he’s eligible,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz tells National Review Online. “He’s a natural-born, not a naturalized, citizen.” Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law and longtime friend of Cruz, agrees, saying the senator was “a citizen at birth, and thus a natural-born citizen — as opposed to a naturalized citizen, which I understand to mean someone who becomes a citizen after birth.”
Federal law extends citizenship beyond those granted it by the 14th Amendment: It confers the privilege on all those born outside of the United States whose parents are both citizens, provided one of them has been “physically present” in the United States for any period of time, as well as all those born outside of the United States to at least one citizen parent who, after the age of 14, has resided in the United States for at least five years. Cruz’s mother, who was born and raised in Delaware, meets the latter requirement, so Cruz himself is undoubtedly an American citizen. No court has ruled what makes a “natural-born citizen,” but there appears to be a consensus that the term refers to those who gain American citizenship by birth rather than by naturalization
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
“It is most likely that Ted Cruz has a Canadian birth certificate rather than a U.S. birth certificate.”
Absolutely!
If Cruz’s mom claims to be a resident of a US state like HI (don’t know if any state other then HI), she could get a state COLB, but the location of birth on the BC should state Canada.
“Barry’s attorney’s will enthusiastically claim he was born a bastard under 1961 law (no such thing now) if that will preserve his US nationality at birth. Then they will point to Marguet-Pillado dicta to claim he is NBC even if born in Kenya to his underage single mom.”
Yea but then they would have to explain the long form birth certificate released on April 27,2011.
The scariest thing is that Obama has already had 176 federal judicial appointments confirmed to their lifetime appointments plus two Supreme Court Justices. There are 26 more federal judicial appointments currently awaiting confirmation. THIS is where Obama will “fundamentally change America.”
When Sr first arrived in Hawaii he already had a black Kenyan wife back in Kenya and at least one child born...
Then he had SAD (supposedly) and a son born here who he ignored for 10 years...
then when he got back to Kenya he got at least to more wives ...one white and one black...
None of them were dead or divorced...
well except for that weird “divorce” that SAD got ...
The “marriage certificate” that is listed as included in the divorce proceeding package but is missing would probably tell us a lot...
place and date for instance...
were they “married” in Kenya by Moslem ceremony or at the US consulate or in Hawaii by a guru friend (again that might not have been a legal ceremony...)
Either way if they did have a ceremony it would not be recognized by US law...it would be bigamy...
a jailable affence, and big trouble for a foreign guy here on a mere student visa who MUST keep his nose clean...
BTW his western education was life or death important to the ambitious Obama SR
I doubt he would have risked it by committing a felony while in the US...
It must have been worth it to him to “marry” the pregnant SAD...
If you try really, REALLY hard, perhaps you can misrepresent my position more than you already have. But it’s going to take a singular effort. You’ve already succeeded in missing it by a light year.
Look, it’s not a trick question. I am genuinely & honestly curious. Of course you don’t have to answer, but nothing bad will happen if you do. Unless you are categorically disinclined to part w the info, might you pls let me know if my surmise [about you being an engineer] is accurate? I’m not looking to say, ‘See—you’re not a lawyer’. That is the last thing on my mind. I just want to know if I intuited correctly. Thank you in advance.
Barry’s attorney’s will enthusiastically claim he was born a bastard under 1961 law (no such thing now) if that will preserve his US nationality at birth. Then they will point to Marguet-Pillado dicta to claim he is NBC even if born in Kenya to his underage single mom.
____________________________________________
Interesting...
If that is so since his Mom SAD was not old enough to have conferred American citizenship on Barry, of what nationality wouldhe have been in that case, at birth ???
hardly any pertaining to the biological father (Kenyan or British) since he would be ruled out as having no standing in this...
Would Barry be a man without a country ???
or what ???
Does it fall back on the responsibility of the US to claim him as one of ours ???
I understand what you’re trying to argue, but when Waite says the provisions have been retained, then it complements why he made a distinction between the classes of persons born in the country to citizen parents and those born in the country without citizen parents. The first class had no doubts about their citizenship. The same is true, in context, when he says the provisions were retained from the naturalization state, that children born abroad to citizen fathers are also citizens with no doubt.
“The vast majority of informed conservatives who read this thread will not think that you are very smart, or a very good person either, for that matter.”
Good grief, K59, what IS it w you & the incessant insults & put downs?????? Is it some type of keyboard Tourette’s??? Have you no idea how tiresome it gets? Are you clueless as to how jerkish it makes you look?
Philman is, fyi, the mirror opposite of what you suggest. He is devastatingly funny, formidably intelligent, & as for ‘good’ - excuse me, but who ON EARTH are you to PROJECT whether others see him as good or not??? Do you imagine yourself to be God, Who alone knows the heart? If not, how can you make such snotty, stupid comments?
Let me ask you something, K58. How do you spend your weekends? Do you spend them helping others w their broken cars & appliances? Do you do this not for friends &/or relatives, but simply for people who need the help? People so desperate, they don’t even have their own tools?
I’ll wait, while you cast back & add up how many recent weekends you’ve spent this way.
While you’re calculating, permit me to inform you that this is what philman, the “not very good person” does. I suppose it makes him bad that he doesn’t charge for his time & expertise. Would you consider him just a little good, if he insisted on payment? Or perhaps it bothers you that he helps people he barely knows. Wd he be better in your sight if he restricted his time & know-how to persons w a more legitimate call upon them?
Oh, that’s right; you haven’t a clue. You passed judgment on him w’out knowing squat. What a stupid, nasty thing to do. A real boneheaded move, wasn’t it.
But philman is the only thing you’ve ever been wrong about, isn’t he? I should trust everything else you say, because you’re always right...except when you’re blunderingly, stupidly, ignorantly wrong.
Okay; got it.
Oh, & btw, philman. Laughed my head off over the Luther Warriors vid you posted, & the particular use you made of it. Still laughing, as a matter of fact. Thanks for the humor break; it was delightful.
OK lets say the Feb ‘61 marriage index is a real entry.
From your #557 it seems that despite the ins’s concerns about bigamy, Hawaii at the time didn’t care if there was a first spouse in another country, just that the first spouse and the second spouse weren’t in the u.s.
So if that’s the case, we have SADO being married.
And the following would apply:
“kid’s birth outside u.s. to married mom” and “5 years past 14 years old”
But she was a few months shy of her 19th birthday when 0 was born.
So the kid isn’t a citizen.
Tenesseee Nana wrote: “Ted Cruz is as much a Cuban as he is an American...”
Kansas replied: “Nana, you have no clue what you are talking about.”
If an American citizen father’s offspring in a foreign country is an American citizen (don’t you agree?), why is a Cuban citizen father’s offspring in a foreign country not a Cuban citizen?
Kansas, you then posted from Travel.State.Gov: “However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country.” You have just proven the “birther’s” point!
This is the whole purpose of the natural born Citizen clause in the Constitution; to PREVENT allegience to a country outside the united States.
A child born in a country of parents who are its citizens can only be a natural born citizen. Can’t be anything else. NATURAL LAW. (NATURAL BORN CITIZEN)
Once you start adding-in foreign parents or outside the parent’s country, you get into MANMADE laws of citizenship.(CITIZEN).
While they may have equal treatment under the law, one can be President, one can’t.
And if SADO was out of the country from Feb to Aug, and we use the case of “kid’s birth outside the u.s. to unmarried mom” she would not have been in the u.s. for a year before the birth abroad.
So here too the kid ain’t a citizen.
“From your #557 it seems that despite the ins’s concerns about bigamy, Hawaii at the time didn’t care if there was a first spouse in another country, just that the first spouse and the second spouse weren’t in the u.s.”
Not quite correct if you look at the case on the SS website that I included in #557 which concerned two bigamous wives in HI at the same time with both claiming inheritance rights:
https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/1505305014
“Where wage earner married a second woman without benefit of termination of his first marriage in China at a time when polygamous marriages were legal, Hawaiian courts would consider the second marriage voidable due to the general public policy against polygamy. However, since Hawaiian courts would rule the marriage voidable rather than void the second wife would have inheritance rights where neither of the parties sought a divorce of nullity at any time. (C~ Tai C. RA IX (T~) to RC, 11/17/82)”
With the fact pattern of the Sr.-SADO marriage, it appears to me that unlike the Chinese marriages, both of which were in China where bigamy was legal making the second marriage voidable but not void, The HI marriage of Sr. and SADO was bigamous under both Kenyan and HI law as was thus VOID (a nullity) and not simply voidable depending on subsequent legal action.
“were they “married” in Kenya by Moslem ceremony or at the US consulate or in Hawaii by a guru friend (again that might not have been a legal ceremony...)”
As I detailed up-thread all available evidence points to NO Muslim marriages for Sr., a totally unobservant former Christian student whose first marriage was almost certainly tribal, NOT Muslim, IMO.
Correct. A statutory citizen (bestowed by man’s pen) can never be a “natural born” citizen (bestowed by God/nature). Obama, Jindal, Rubio and Cruz are not natural born Citizens. I haven’t checked on the circumstances behind the birth of Gov. Nikki Haley and her parents citizenship status at the time of her birth.
so IF he did “marry” SAD in Hawaii it wasnt because he was thinking it was OKJ with the folks at home because he and they were Mos;lem...
and then Barry goes to visit his “family” granny Sarah etc in Kenya...
I wonder just when they learnt of his birth...
Sr goes home to Kenya “Oh BTW I have a son in Hawaii...”
“Oh joy” says granny Sarah “I do hope I can get to meet him some day before I die”
The point is that any custody trial court must have jurisdiction which is based on residency. As we have seen, residency does not seem to require proof of citizenship in many jurisdictions in the US these days.
“Arpaio’s posse claimed they had evidence from a very specific US government manual that proved the birth certificate was a fraud.”
Link please. You’re not referring to the debunked Woodson nonsense, are you?
The evidence of LFBC pdf forgery of the Arpaio Posse has now reportedly been verified by a forensic electronic document laboratory certified to give testimony in federal criminal investigations, in addition to scores of experts filing affidavits attesting to the same conclusion.
“Oh joy” says granny Sarah “I do hope I can get to meet him some day before I die”
Gramma Sarah is on record saying that POTUS Barry “passed through my hands”...common parlance for “I held him in my hands when he was a baby”...and is also on tape reportedly insisting in her tribal language that she was at Barry’s birth in Mombasa at a relatives home...over the alarmed coaching of her family handler who insisted that she meant to say Honolulu was the place of birth...and she rebuts him saying “No. Mombasa.”
Yeah
:)
LOL! The mental gymnastics they went through are almost disgustingly admirable, in a way.
From Wong Kim Ark quoting Marshall: The constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the courts of the United States, precisely under the same circumstances under which a native might sue.
To the rest of the quote by Marshall;
He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen, except so far as the constitution makes the distinction. The law makes none.
There is, then, no resemblance between the act incorporating the Bank, and the general naturalization law.
Osborn v. Bank of the United States
Gee what distinction does the Constitution make again?
Snip-pity, snip, snip!
-----
Also came by this by Breckinridge Long from the St Louis Bar and didn't know if you had seen it. It's a very good illustration of how the alien/citizenship issue worked before the Supreme Court turned a temporary naturalization Amendment into a way of life.
Is Mr. Charles Evans Hughes a “natural born citizen” within the Meaning of the Constitution?
The doctrines of dual citizenship and of double allegiance are too well known and too wellfounded in international law to be doubted or disputed.
“The doctrine of ‘Election’ necessarily implies the existence of a double allegiance. This condition naturally arises where a person is born in one country to a father who is a citizen of another country. By rules of municipal law, which generally prevail, such a person has citizenships by birth—(1) citizenship by virtue of the place of birth (jure soli) and (2)citizenship by right of blood (jure sanguinis) i.e., by virtue of the father’s nationality. Unless this be so, the child on attaining his majority has nothing to elect.” (Moore, International Law Digest, III, 524-525.)
Chicago Legal News , Vol. 146-148, pp. 220-222
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.