If Hamburger is correct, and all administrative law is actually unconstitutional, then things are not that simple. The following was written by a friend of mine. It is based on the premise of the book and bears consideration:
The constitution:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,
That second comma is very misleading. Take it out, and the meaning of the sentence is clear. At the time the constitution was written, it was common to toss commas in from time to time...they were flourishes; we don't do that so much these days.
Basically, most people believe the doctrine of jus sanguinis applies. In fact it does not.
Like The One Leader's many executive orders, the federal law that makes Cruz eligible for the presidency is unconstitutional. To be effective, it would have to be in the form of an amendment to the constitution, which it is not.
Most of this mess is the work of the courts, basically. They began screwing the goose with firearms restrictions intended to be enforced against black citizens only, continued with the Slaughter-House cases, expanded the nonsense under the New Deal (after FDR threatened them), grossly misinterpreted the interstate commerce clause, and lately bungled -- thanks to that asshole Roberts -- the Obamacare decision. The courts do not get it right every time.
.
I would like to hear Mark Levin's views on this.
What about Anchor babies like Jindal and Rubio?
The Constitution, which is our basic law, does not define the term “natural-born citizen. But the First Congress, which included members of the Convention, chose to follow Lex Sanguinas and their definition therefore has great weight. The intent is to deny the Presidency to a foreign prince, such as the liberal Prince Henry of Prussia, and it does.
I have been into discussions on eligibility for POTUSA for a long time. I believe much of the dissention centers around personal wishes. Your posting gave me some more light and thoughts on the matter. The commas must have had meaning for the Founders as they were very astute and versed men. As I recall from my English grammar training decades ago commas were to be used to delineate connected phrases/thoughts. If so and in accord I take the construction as written to say that at the time there were ‘natural born’ citizens’ i.e. on US soil and there were also other persons e.g. from overseas taken as ‘ Citizens of the United States’ at That Time. I tend to believe the Founders intentionally meant to distinguish between ‘now’ and the ‘future’. No problem for me.