Chin: Ted Cruz can be president, probably

News4Jax.com ^ | Published On: Aug 13 2013 05:59:22 PM EDT | By Gabriel "Jack" Chin Special to CNN

[Perdogg]

The Constitution says that only "natural born citizens" are eligible to be president. Is Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas eligible, given that he was born in Canada of a U.S. citizen mother and a Cuban immigrant father?

If Cruz runs, 2016 will be the third consecutive election in which there were questions about the right of a major party candidate to serve. Unfortunately, the Framers left few clues about exactly what a "natural born citizen" is; Congress has not used the phrase in citizenship statutes since 1790.

[Nero Germanicus]

Too many logical fallacies in that one sentence to list.

[DiogenesLamp]

Ted Cruz was born a Citizen according to the laws of the United States of America in effect at the time of his birth. He is by virtue of that fact a Natural Born Citizen in accordance with the plain meaning of the Constitution.

End of story.

Saying so does not make it so. To be a "natural born citizen" he must meet the requirements contemplated by the founders in 1787 when they wrote in the requirement.

According to their understanding, someone born in a foreign country to an American mother would not be an American citizen at all.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-— According to their understanding, someone born in a foreign country to an American mother would not be an American citizen at all. -—

What country, then? Cuba? Canada?

[DiogenesLamp]

but do remember, this group may be incapable of rethinking their position, perhaps incapable of seeing they may be wrong. It's a deep hardening, a sad chapter in the ongoing saga of FR.

And does the thought ever occur to you that the converse may be true?

I'll support Cruz. I don't think he meets the criteria, but I don't think the criteria even matter anymore.

[DiogenesLamp]

Why did George Washington sign a law that said those born overseas were natural born citizens?

The devil is in the details. George Washington signed a bill saying such "shall be considered as" Natural born citizens. Once again, these words do not mean "is."

I will also direct your attention to the TITLE of the act.

United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).

Do you have to be hit over the head with a clue bat to understand that NATURALIZATION is in the title? That the act is one of NATURALIZATION?

[DiogenesLamp]

There is no mention of Hitler or the Nazis and Indiana case law takes precedence.

Might as well have been. Ankeny has been shown to be based on the most cockamamie and ridiculous reasoning, such that any reference to it should automatically award the point against anyone citing it. It is the DRED SCOTT of eligibility stupidity.

It is the ROE v WADE of eligibility Stupidity. It is the Wickard, it is the Kelo, it is the Obamacare ruling. It is concentrated and utter stupidity given a black robe aura of pseudo authority.

It is a manifestation of irrationality tied up in a pretty red legal ribbon. It is the equivalent of introducing Nazis into an unrelated discussion, and this is why I assert that it is the eligibility "Goodwin."

It's existence derogates the entire legal system.

[DiogenesLamp]

Too many logical fallacies in that one sentence to list.

Not the way you've been going on. I've seen your many lists of logical fallacies since you've been on these threads.

You call them "court cases" or something, but it is readily apparent what they are. Arguments based on compound error made into a methodology.

The court system is Broken. It makes RIDICULOUS rulings. It is as respectable as Caligula's Senate, but with far more horses' @sses.

Make that marsupials.

[DiogenesLamp]

What country, then? Cuba? Canada?

Well, if he had been born in Canada, the English rule would apply. (I think it still does.) And the founders would have recognized him as a British Subject.

[DiogenesLamp]

Are you claiming that Ted Cruz is not even a citizen at all?

I am claiming that he is a naturalized citizen who owes his citizenship to a naturalization law passed by congress in 1934 and subsequent iterations thereof.

His citizenship was awarded AT BIRTH (not by birth) with conditions of Age and Residency for his mother.

Natural born citizens' mothers do not have to MEET any conditions because natural citizens do not HAVE conditional citizenship.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Does that make any sense to you?

[Nero Germanicus]

The Supreme Court of Indiana denied cert to a review of Ankeny, so obviously they didn’t find it to be that flawed. The Plaintiifs didn’t appeal the decision to the federal courts but federal courts have issued similar decisions.
For example:
Rhodes v MacDonald, US District Court Judge Clay D. Land: “A spurious claim questioning the president’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, September 16, 2009.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19809978/RHODES-v-MacDONALD-13-ORDER-denying-3-Motion-for-TRO-granting-8-Motion-to-Dismiss-Ordered-by-Judge-Clay-D-Land-on-09162009-CGC-Entered-0

Or:
Tisdale v Obama, US District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.: “It is well settled that those born within the United States are natural born citizens.”— Tisdale v Obama, US District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, January 23, 2012.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/82011399/Tisdale-v-Obama-EDVA-3-12-cv-00036-Doc-2-ORDER-23-Jan-2012

[xzins]

It’s not a theory; it’s a hypothetical.

Now, I’ve read the renunciation pages for the government, and it says:

” Minors seeking to renounce their U.S. citizenship must demonstrate to a consular officer that they are acting voluntarily and that they fully understand the implications/consequences attendant to the renunciation of U.S. citizenship. “

No one has ever come forward suggesting this was done, and it is the only way a renunciation can be done for a minor.

[xzins]

And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens

Do we have to hit you over the head to get you to understand that the Constitution gives to Congress regarding the rule of naturalization the power "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

Therefore, in order to define who needs to be naturalized it made sense for Congress to define who did not need to be naturalized.

Those born of US parents overseas did NOT need to be naturalized. When one considered their particular case, they were to be viewed as "natural born citizens" and NOT as "naturalized citizens."

Now, if you consider someone to be a "natural born citizen" for purposes of the law, then that person fulfills the requirement for being elected to the presidency.

You seem to have a reading comprehension problem in this area, Dio. While I admire your desire to be faithful to the Constitution, it appears that you have latched onto an incorrect interpretation in this case and are determined to stand by it come hell or high water.

You are standing on sinking sand, Dio. Cruz will be a candidate, and he will be immune from any legal challenge should he run, because he is LEGALLY a BORN citizen of the USA. In other words, there can be no challenge that has even the tiniest bit of credibility.

[xzins]

Cruz does not have conditional citizenship...he is a citizen.

Cruz was not “awarded” citizenship; it was recognized that he possessed natural citizenship:

To apply for recognition of citizenship, you have options:

Your Consular Report of Birth Abroad, or FS-240, provides proof of citizenship if your birth was registered at the nearest U.S. consulate when you were born. For more information you can link to the U.S. Department of State Web site from the “Related Links” section in the upper right corner of this page.

If you are already in the United States, apply for a Certificate of Citizenship. Use Form N-600, Application for Certificate of Citizenship, also available from the “Related Links” section in the upper right corner of this page.

So, his citizenship already existed and the government RECOGNIZES it. It does not AWARD it.

Cruz’s mother was out of the US, so she had to show evidence of HER citizenship. She did. Therefore, her son, Ted Cruz, was recognized as a birth right US citizen, or in the Founder’s words in the law of 1790, a “natural born citizen.”

[Ray76]

“Those born of US parents overseas did NOT need to be naturalized.”

On what do you base this claim?

[DiogenesLamp]

Does that make any sense to you?

I've never thought the English rule made sense. (in a Republic. It makes PERFECT sense in a Monarchy.) Every since before Aristotle, the rule was that children followed the condition of their father.

The English rule is based on feudal land bondage. If a neighbor's cow drops a calf in your pasture, it's YOUR calf. Since Monarchs want more servants, laying claim to someone born on your land is a pretty good idea. The feudal notion is that all born on the lord's demesnes is a servant to that Lord.

Jus Soli, law of soil. It's incompatible with a Free Republic.

[Nero Germanicus]

The formulation of a theory begins with a hypothesis.

Yes I agree with you that there is no evidence that there was ever an attempt by 6-9 year old Obama to renounce U.S. citizenship.

U.S. Courts have always treated dual citizenship acquired by minors as different from willfully acquiring foreign citizenship as an adult.

[DiogenesLamp]

[MamaTexan]

Natural born citizens' mothers do not have to MEET any conditions because natural citizens do not HAVE conditional citizenship.

LOL! I'm having trouble getting over the 'NATURAL born' Citizens can somehow spring into existence with only one NATURAL parent. It's not just nonsensical on its face, either.

The idea that American citizenship is the only one that matters in the world is downright arrogant, IMHO - not to mention denying a child half of their birthright.

[PA-RIVER]

My daughter was born in the USA to a foreign national and an myself, an American.

She’s a dual citizen at birth. Just like our president. Not a natural. She’s a hybrid. Biracial and dual citizen, just like our president.

A natural pair has no wild card. My daughter has the wild card. She now holds two passports, just as our president was entitled to do. (Although I think he held three)

Am I a racist or a birther? No. I just understand and accept what is true.