Posted on 08/26/2013 1:51:55 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
This article appeared on Daily Caller on August 26, 2013.
As we head into a potential government shutdown over the funding of Obamacare, the iconoclastic junior senator from Texas — love him or hate him — continues to stride across the national stage. With his presidential aspirations as big as everything in his home state, by now many know what has never been a secret: Ted Cruz was born in Canada.
(Full disclosure: I’m Canadian myself, with a green card. Also, Cruz has been a friend since his days representing Texas before the Supreme Court.)
But does that mean that Cruz’s presidential ambitions are gummed up with maple syrup or stuck in snowdrifts altogether different from those plaguing the Iowa caucuses? Are the birthers now hoist on their own petards, having been unable to find any proof that President Obama was born outside the United States but forcing their comrade-in-boots to disqualify himself by releasing his Alberta birth certificate?
No, actually, and it’s not even that complicated; you just have to look up the right law. It boils down to whether Cruz is a “natural born citizen” of the United States, the only class of people constitutionally eligible for the presidency. (The Founding Fathers didn’t want their newly independent nation to be taken over by foreigners on the sly.)
What’s a “natural born citizen”? The Constitution doesn’t say, but the Framers’ understanding, combined with statutes enacted by the First Congress, indicate that the phrase means both birth abroad to American parents — in a manner regulated by federal law — and birth within the nation’s territory regardless of parental citizenship. The Supreme Court has confirmed that definition on multiple occasions in various contexts.
There’s no ideological debate here: Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe and former solicitor general Ted Olson — who were on opposite sides in Bush v. Gore among other cases — co-authored a memorandum in March 2008 detailing the above legal explanation in the context of John McCain’s eligibility. Recall that McCain — lately one of Cruz’s chief antagonists — was born to U.S. citizen parents serving on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone.
In other words, anyone who is a citizen at birth — as opposed to someone who becomes a citizen later (“naturalizes”) or who isn’t a citizen at all — can be president.
So the one remaining question is whether Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth. That’s an easy one. The Nationality Act of 1940 outlines which children become “nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.” In addition to those who are born in the United States or born outside the country to parents who were both citizens — or, interestingly, found in the United States without parents and no proof of birth elsewhere — citizenship goes to babies born to one American parent who has spent a certain number of years here.
That single-parent requirement has been amended several times, but under the law in effect between 1952 and 1986 — Cruz was born in 1970 — someone must have a citizen parent who resided in the United States for at least 10 years, including five after the age of 14, in order to be considered a natural-born citizen. Cruz’s mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware, lived most of her life in the United States, and gave birth to little Rafael Edward Cruz in her 30s. Q.E.D.
So why all the brouhaha about where Obama was born, given that there’s no dispute that his mother, Ann Dunham, was a citizen? Because his mother was 18 when she gave birth to the future president in 1961 and so couldn’t have met the 5-year-post-age-14 residency requirement. Had Obama been born a year later, it wouldn’t have mattered whether that birth took place in Hawaii, Kenya, Indonesia, or anywhere else. (For those born since 1986, by the way, the single citizen parent must have only resided here for five years, at least two of which must be after the age of 14.)
In short, it may be politically advantageous for Ted Cruz to renounce his Canadian citizenship before making a run at the White House, but his eligibility for that office shouldn’t be in doubt. As Tribe and Olson said about McCain — and could’ve said about Obama, or the Mexico-born George Romney, or the Arizona-territory-born Barry Goldwater — Cruz “is certainly not the hypothetical ‘foreigner’ who John Jay and George Washington were concerned might usurp the role of Commander in Chief.”
NBC is a clear title one generation back and says the person is American and nothing else such that everyone agreea.
Where do you get citizenship from? Some say mom, some say dad or some say place of birth.
When mom, dad and place of birth all agree, that is the least diluted, most pure, highest quality citizenship. That person is an American, natural born, and not a person or nation can say otherwise. S/He has a clear, clean American title.
With Cruz, none agree. He could be from America, Cuba or Canada, depending upon which is credited with being the source of citizenship.
In this sale, Cruz has a blemished title, so to speak, that has been made wholesome again by both law and treaty, but not by the circumstances of his birth.
To be eligible for President, you need a clean, blemish free American title. That was the intent. That was also in harmony with international laws at the time and now.
And...also compatible with human nature. Do you remember way back when it was controversial to have a NATO or UN officer command American troops? Citizen soldiers want an American to lead them. It used to be important, especially in the beginning, hence the NBC requirement.
It may not matter to you, but it matters and it will be a fight should he run.
If I were a progressive demonrat or a GOPe french rino, I'd try to get him to run. Divide and conquer! And, maybe make the obama problems go away at the same time.
I’m not anti-Ted Cruz in any way. I love the man, but really?
Next you’re going to tell us he has a degree from Harvard law...
/johnny
What?
Please ping me when you aren't posting nonsense.
At least we’re both consistent on this issue.
I have been politically active for a long time and following this issue since 2008... I have also read many previous posts. Why the hostility? You think my opinion is not as relevant as yours because you signed up earlier?
/johnny
/johnny
Never said that you are.
For me, Not all current laws are necessarily constitutional.
They are laws and I will follow them but they are subject to review and modification.
I am sure you will agree that a bad law should not amend the constitution. We have an constitutional amendment process for that.
For me,I always go back to the original document and original intent.
Some people worship at the alter of legal precedent..... Not me
Too subtle for you? Sorry, let me clarify: Man with a law degree from one of the most acclaimed law schools in the nation did not understand the ramifications of dual citizenship at birth: simply does not compute.
I like Ted Cruz. He has my respect. I do however, despise cheerleaderism and personality cults. He MIGHT not be the best bet for a conservative presidential candidate (for the reasons mentioned).
No man is perfect, and I’ll overlook the obvious fudge on his not knowing that ignoring it didn’t “settle” it... But please, don’t draw that response from the interview as if it were the sword of truth; it’s unbecoming.
Ted Cruz knows the law.
What is silly is for anonymous internet posters to be claiming that Ted Cruz or other posters are “ignoring the law”.
Sorry, this whole thread was posted to cite the relevant law.
What you are saying - whomever you are - isn’t the law and neither is what I’ve seen from others.
BTW, you need to go back and re-read. I never accused anyone of smearing Ted Cruz because they pound the birther issue. Two posters claimed Ted Cruz’s father Rafael was alligned with Castro when Rafael was fighting Cuba’s dictator Bautista during the time Castro was fighting him. When all that happened was that the young teen Rafael Cruz fought the dictator for Cuban FREEDOM, then escaped from Cuba to FREEDOM in America and made an American Dream life of hard work and personal responsibility. It isn’t his fault AT ALL that after Castro won the fight there, he declared himself a Communist dictator.
But two posters want us to believe that Ted Cruz’s hero father is a Communist sympathizer when nothing is farther from the truth.
That was the smear.
You didn’t read enough and you think you are being accused of smearing Cruz because of your birther views. While incorrect, they aren’t the subject of a smear, as I just explained.
People will read what you posted and what I posted and decide who is correct. As far as I am concerned, I already proved my point. I think the meaning of article 2 section 1 clause 5 is very clear..... you think it is intentionally ambiguous. Maybe one day the supreme court will rule. Until then, I will advocate for what I believe. I am done with you.... Have a nice evening.
No your comment wasn't "subtle", it was a non-squitur. Your comment where you said, "Next you’re going to tell us he has a degree from Harvard law..." doesn't logically follow from any point of view that I gave.
Do you understand that?
I invite you to review my posts.... You will see that I am not a troll.... I am a patriot who loves this country, the Constitution and the rule of law..... Take Care
That means donating money to his campaign and volunteering to work on his campaign.
Unless some else comes on the scene, Cruz is our last, best hope of saving this country.
I hate to write that because I hate cult of personalities that spring up over political figures. See Obama as example of a cult of personality that went bad. But I don't see other way out of the country's current mess.
I know, I know...
Just further highlighting our sorry State of the Union.
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.