When the Constitution was written a woman did not hold citizenship separate from her father/husband. I wonder how the courts will judge that now?
It may not matter. The founders used a term, Natural Born Citizen, that had been in use for a couple of thousand years. In the 18th century the meaning was “born in a country to parents that were it’s citizens.”
The Founders idea was that they could avoid their experience with King George III, who had German influence/loyalties in his life, by requiring that a President’s parents both be citizens so that a child’s upbringing would be exclusively American.
While I don’t doubt Cruz’s loyalty, by the letter of the law Cruz does not meet the requirement. Ignoring the clearly written requirements had disastrous results for the US by allowing Obama to skirt them unchallenged. The fears of the Founders came to be!
In Obama’s case it appears the USSC was unwilling to overturn an elected and sitting President. I wonder what they’ll do if a candidate is challenged before an election. I’ll speculate that they will address the issue in that instance., and uphold the letter of the law.....
Business as usual.....the Democrats won’t let the Republicans get away with things that the Democrats are allowed to get away with because of Republican unwillingness to confront them. Sigh!
Interesting analysis Forty-Niner.
Here is a question for you: Is there any other category of citizen besides the 2 that I can think of-—”Naturalized” or “Natural born”?