Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nero Germanicus

Wow, there’s nothing “natural” in citing convoluted statutes on immigration and nationality that fall under the title of “Aliens and Nationality” in the U.S. Code. You’ve just helped prove why Cruz would not be a natural-born citizen.


49 posted on 05/08/2013 8:53:04 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: edge919

There is no distinction in law between a “Citizen of the United States at Birth” and a “Natural-born Citizen.” One is an 18th century term, the other is a 19th century term, but they are synonymous.

“The Constitution does not say in words who shall be a natural-born citizen. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.”—Minor v. Happersett (1874). One of the “elsewheres” who shall be a “natural-born citizen” can be ascertained is statutory law as codified in the U.S. Code.

Both Triers of Fact and members of Congress are very used to interpreting and applying the legal language of “convoluted” (to laypersons such as yourself) statutes.

I can guarantee you with 100% metaphysical certitude that if Senator Cruz decides to run, judges will rule him to be Article II, Section 1 eligible and Congress will pass a bi-partisan “sense of the Senate” resolution confirming his eligibility just as they did in 2008 with Senate Resolution 511 for Panama Canal Zone-born John Sidney McCain.


52 posted on 05/08/2013 11:24:41 PM PDT by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson