As buzz mounts, Ted Cruz’s White House eligibility again questioned

Washingon Times ^

[Perdogg]

Ted Cruz’s address at the annual South Carolina Republican Party dinner Friday helped feed growing speculation that the freshman senator from Texas is eyeing a run for the White House in 2016 — and raised yet another round of questions about his eligibility to serve in the Oval Office.

Mr. Cruz was born in Canada to an American-born mother and Cuban-born father, and was a citizen from birth — but that Canadian factor puts him in the company of other past candidates who have had their eligibility questioned because of the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural born citizen.”

[GBA]

Perhaps the one stream media will use Ted Cruz, someone their side is deathly afraid of, to finally come clean about obama's ineligibility.

For whatever reasons, including fear of reprisal and potential death by obamacide courtesy of the Chicago Way, the now obama stream one stream MSM has dodged and ridiculed all who ask the questions that they now have the self interest to ask, all thanks to the specter of potus candidate Ted Cruz.

May they finally do the right things, even if motivated by the wrong reasons, for indeed, God works in mysterious ways!

[Las Vegas Ron]

So English citizenship law doesn’t matter but Cuban and Kenyan does?

As I posted earlier, which you come how conveniently "forget", if citizenship is passed through the blood it has nothing to do with law, does it. It becomes a birthright.

You posited that Cruz has his citizenship via jus sanguinis, not me.

[luvie]

What’s sauce for zero is sauce for a good man like Ted Cruz! Of course, we don’t know if HE wants to run...yet...

[allmendream]

American law should always reflect our best understanding of natural law. There are two natural law principles that are weighed when granting citizenship at birth. Cruz is through blood. With others it is soil. With others it is some combination of the two.

My natural right to keep and bear arms is not merely a statutory right because it is recognized by statute. A natural born citizen is not merely a statutory citizen when that natural allegiance at birth is recognized by statute.

[so_real]

Vattel wrote "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." Had McCain been born "on-base" in Panama, arguably Vattel would have found him to be a natural born citizen. But McCain was born in a hospital off-base. Hence the dilemma regarding his eligibility as a citizen by statute.

[so_real]

I voted for Cruz in his run for the Senate and I'd vote for him every day for any office other than POTUS. It's too bad his father didn't forsee this and become an American citizen before Ted was born but we must follow the Constitution.

Agreed.

[bluecat6]

Thanks for the tidbit on the Cruz’s father.

It was interesting that only the mother’s citizenship is referenced. I suspected that the father, like Rubio’s parents, was not formally naturalized until after the birth.

Any link to reference the father’s naturalization date? Just for reference. Not questioning at all.

....

So now we have a person born to a single US citizen mother abroad. By a Congressional approved man made law she was able to pass citizenship at birth. But its not natural born citizenship. It is a form of naturalization - from birth.

For those who say (incorrectly) that being a citizen or qualified to be a citizen AT birth is the sole determining factor of Article II, Section 1 status you are wrong.

The situation of Puerto Rico proves this. Some (Fox News) says that those born in Puerto Rico are natural born Citizens and eligible to old the Peoples office of President. Not so, citizens of Puerto Rico are US citizens under COLLECTIVE NATURALIZATION. That is a fact it is referenced in numerous government documents. They are definitely and without a doubt NATURALIZED. Naturalized citizens can not be natural born Citizens. The two sets do not intersect.

So citizen AT birth is the criteria for natural born status - Peurto Rico proves it.

[allmendream]

Did you only ever read that ONE passage of Vattel?

Vattel went on to say that the children of soldiers serving overseas would be counted as born IN country for such purposes.

So according to Vattel, McCain would be an indigenous or native (natural born) citizen.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Cruz is not eligible and neither is Rubio or Jindal but neither is BHO.

It appears that the 535 elected legislators and 9 Supreme Court judges that run our country have decided to unilaterally change the definition of natural born citizen.

If so then if they let RINO Rubio run for President they darn well better let Ted Cruz run.

[Las Vegas Ron]

A natural born citizen is not merely a statutory citizen when that natural allegiance at birth is recognized by statute.

NBC has nothing to do with statute, it is what it is, natural.

Born to two American Citizens on American soil does not require any statutes.

The Founders intent was to eliminate any other loyalties other than to America and its Constitution, other birth circumstance's do not support that ideal.

Jus sanguinis and jus soli according to Haperset satisfies NBC, there are doubts to others.

What better understanding of Natural Law could there be?

It's just common sense, imo.

[okie01]

It appears that the 535 elected legislators and 9 Supreme Court judges that run our country have decided to unilaterally change the definition of natural born citizen.

Er, there never has been a definition of "natural-born citizen" as it is used in the Constitution.

So, how could anybody change the definition?

[allmendream]

No natural right is conveyed through statute. Yet statute can and does recognize many natural rights. A statute recognizing natural rights doesn’t make it a statutory right.

[Georgia Girl 2]

“Er, there never has been a definition of “natural-born citizen” as it is used in the Constitution.”

I was wondering when you would show up.

[so_real]

You are referencing section 217 : "For the same reasons also, children born out of the country, in the armies of the state, or in the house of its minister at a foreign court, are reputed born in the country; for a citizen who is absent with his family, on the service of the state, but still dependent on it, and subject to its jurisdiction, cannot be considered as having quitted its territory." This is a good point. I'll make the on-base / off-base argument for formality sake, but happily acquiesce that Vattel is the NBC authority, and hold Cruz to the same standard.

[BfloGuy]

He not eligible because he’s not a NBC so why do they keep bringing it up?

Because he didn't need to be naturalized. By definition, he is a natural born citizen. You're overcomplicating the concept.

[Las Vegas Ron]

So what does that have to due with being a NBC?

No statute can convey it, it is a state of nature and Natural Law.

There is not “right” to be POTUS, but you are required to be a NBC....not so for all other offices.

Ya think they may have had something in mind by differentiating the requirements, ie Citizen vs NBC?

[okie01]

Wouldn’t want to disappoint you...

[bluecat6]

He is naturalized. A law via congress is a form of naturalization.

That law may have provided citizenship AT birth. But like the Puerto Ricans it is a form of naturalization.

[MMaschin]

So, is Cruz also a Natural Born Citizen of Canada?

Cruz WAS naturalized. 'Naturalized', is not a process that ends with a test. To be naturalized, means that there is some positive (man made) law that has been written to make you a citizen.

There are two types of laws, 'natural' and 'positive'. 'Natural' laws are the unwritten laws of nature, 'positive' laws are man made laws.

There are laws that have been written that state that Cruz is a citizen at birth, and without those laws, he would not have been a citizen at birth. He was 'naturalized' automatically by the fact of his birth.

Is someone born in the US, to two US citizen parents a citizen at birth? Yes. Is there a man made law stating such? No. Why? Because one is not required. Such a person is a Citizen by 'natural' law, and is 'naturally' a citizen. Notice the context of the word 'naturally'? It means because nothing else can be true. The same is true in the context of 'natural born citizen', and 'natural law', it is true, because nothing else can be true.

An easier way to look at this might be to look at it in a negative context. Could any law be removed or changed to remove the situation that allowed Cruz to be a citizen at birth? Yes. Is there any law that could be repealed or changed that result in a person being born in the US, of two Citizen parents, not being a US citizen at birth? NO! That is because they are a citizen via 'natural law'.

[rlmorel]

I have no problem with questioning his eligibility and confirming it AS LONG AS THEY DO IT FOR ALL CANDIDATES CONCLUSIVELY.