CATO Institute: Yes, Ted Cruz Can be President

CATO Institute ^ | Aug 26, 2013 | By Ilya Shapiro, Senior Fellow In Constitutional Studies, Cato

[Jim Robinson]

By Ilya Shapiro, Senior Fellow In Constitutional Sudies and Editor-In-Chief, Cato Supreme Court Review

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.”

[Henry Hnyellar]

Amen!

[lentulusgracchus]

[MR] Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization.

Actually there was a third: by marriage.

Didn't work for my mother, a war bride from The Big Show. When my dad was posted overseas (U.S. military) she had to stay in the States and file papers for citizenship, because if she'd followed him prematurely to his foreign posting, she'd have had difficulty reentering the U.S. later on, since she was still a foreign national.

[Uncle Chip]

It wasn’t that way until the Cable Act in 1922 when it became possible to have 2 citizen households.

[4Zoltan]

FWIW

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/09/natural-born-citizens-marco-rubio-bobby-jindal-ted-cruz/comment-page-1/

[Baynative]

I'd like to see a test for being an American at heart!

[DiogenesLamp]

While I like her love of freedom, etc., I didn’t always agree with her, and was disappointed to find out that she had some kind of relationship with a married man who was her friend’s husband.

Ayn Rand was more libertarian than conservative. I suspect this is why she's not more popular in conservative circles. Having Grown up in Amoral Socialist Russia, it is not surprising that she hadn't been taught better behavior when she was young.

Still, her mind was very sharp and her novels have come very close to accurately predicting the world in which we are living.

[BigGuy22]

“Ayn Rand was more libertarian than conservative. I suspect this is why she’s not more popular in conservative circles.”
__

She also had low regard for religion, and that too alienates many conservatives.

[Lakeshark]

She was excellent in showing how leftist totalitarians work to gain and hold power. These were her finest observations and sh deserves kudos for seeing them clearly.

Her solutions were often shallow and lacking perspective.

[faucetman]

If any of you REALLY want to know what you are talking about when it comes to NBC, you MUST read this comprehensive and definative essay on the subject. It is very long, that’s why it’s “comprehensive”.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2840767/posts

I can’t read 800 posts to see if this was already addressed or not. Also it has been posted on previous occasions and you may have seen it. I implore you to take the time to actually read the whole thing. It’s dry at times and harder for non-lawyers like me, but it is the best and I would say indisputable proof of what a natural born Citizen is.

He covers EVERYTHING! You could not read and understand this essay without knowing exactly what a natural born Citizen is and ALWAYS was, WITHOUT A DOUBT. Original intent, case law, natural law, common law, British law, constitution, amendments, framers, founders (Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, David Ramsay, George Mason), historians, dictionaries, definitions & meanings, law books, treatises and cases, Vattel validated, legal principles of the Supreme Court, and on & on.

I thought I knew alot about this issue, but I was blown away by the depth to which (screen name, sourcery) has gone to prove the meaning and intended and actual constitutional meaning of natural born Citizen (and citizens of all stripes for that matter).

[DiogenesLamp]

That would be the opinion that WKA reversed, since that OPINION was in the DISSENT.

You know what wasn't in either the dissent or the majority? Any reference to the case of James McClure, A case of Far greater significance, and with far less assailable authorities than Thomas F Bayard. (John Armstrong, James Madison, and James Monroe.)

Odd that.

[4Zoltan]

(John Armstrong, James Madison, and James Monroe.)

When was James McClure issued a US passport by the American Minister in London, “confessing him to be a native citizen of the United States”?

[Jim Robinson]

Run, Ted, run! You got my support 100%. And you will have the vast majority of grassroots behind you!

Damn the well-meaning, but short-sighted, naysaying torpedo launchers! Full steam ahead!

[DiogenesLamp]

When was James McClure issued a US passport by the American Minister in London, “confessing him to be a native citizen of the United States”?

I would presume it was in 1807, but it could have been earlier (or later) than that. "The Horizon" was in England as early as 1801.

Note the Barely legible "McClure" as Co-Owner under "Mackler".

What you need to understand was Britain and France were at war during this time period and that there was rampant forgery of documents going on, especially as regards British Subjects attempting to pass themselves off as American citizens.

And really there are so many examples of this that I could go on and on about them.

Suffice it to say, Diplomatic Staff in other countries were very leery of accepting any documents from London, so it is no Surprise that John Armstrong was suspicious of James McClure's claimed citizenship. McClure was known to be shipping material for British Merchants, a big no-no at this point in time. I believe at one point American Diplomatic staff was ORDERED to clamp down on people claiming American citizenship and who were not.

Armstrong simply invoked the desired scrutiny of James McClure's citizenship and decided he wasn't a citizen because his father didn't naturalize until AFTER he was born. There was no need for such scrutiny in London because no French man was going to pass himself off as either a Brit or an American, so they had no need to worry about what citizenship people claimed while in London, but in France however, it was a real problem.

The point remains, once the facts were known, Armstrong asserted McClure's citizenship was in question because of his father's naturalization occurring AFTER he was born, and Madison was informed of the situation and did not countermand Armstrong's decision.

And let me assure you on one particular point. James Madison knew very well who was James McClure. It was no mistake or oversight on Madison's part to leave him there in French Custody. I would like to tell you more, but I don't want to spill the beans on this story just yet. I will tell you this. There is a LOT more to this story than meets the eye.

By the way, McClure didn't come back to the United States.

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

My understanding is that in order to be an NBC like Obama you have to have a forged birth certificate. Ted is lacking in that most important element.

[Tau Food]

Well, be patient. Before too long, Orly Taitz or one of her financial supporters might come up with a forged Cuban birth certificate for Cruz.

Never underestimate birther-mania. Just when you think you've heard it all, well, you learn that they're really just getting warmed up.

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

The only difference is that Obama has a real forged birth certificate that he(obama) posted not Orly.

[4Zoltan]

“There is a LOT more to this story than meets the eye.”

Like McClure and his cohort - US consular Aaron Vale?

Was it a coincidence that McClure was arrested by the French in the city of Orleans?

And what about Alexander and those charges made against him in 1810?

Who would have thought that Florida real estate was so valuable back then?

BTW, Isn’t John Alexander credited with losing Washington to the British in the War of 1812?

[Tau Food]

I want you to stay on the Obama case until you have completely solved it. I want you to prove where he was born, the identify of his real father, the identity of his real mother and where he was during the time that he says he was at Columbia University.

While you're working on the Obama case, I'll handle the Cruz case. I'll be fair and balanced.

Ted Cruz - 2016

[DiogenesLamp]

Like McClure and his cohort - US consular Aaron Vale?

Was it a coincidence that McClure was arrested by the French in the city of Orleans?

I very much doubt it. As one Fire Marshall I used to know put it, "The only buildings that burn, are those that need to."

And what about Alexander and those charges made against him in 1810?

Who would have thought that Florida real estate was so valuable back then?

BTW, Isn’t John Alexander credited with losing Washington to the British in the War of 1812?

Now you have me interested in YOUR sources of information. I think you know EXACTLY why Madison wanted McClure locked up.

I'm interested in whatever you've found. Please send me links by Freepmail.

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

No need for that..We just need to indict the forgers. One grand jury should do it. They will cough up all the details then you can decide. This is pretty easy now that we know the BC is a fraud. But, we have nobody with courage left in the Congress.