Posted on 01/08/2016 9:57:21 AM PST by Behind the Blue Wall
On Ted Cruz's eligibility, if he's the great advocate of the Constitution that he purports to be, I don't see why he doesn't agree to the public release of his immigration and naturalization file. Yes, he absolutely has to have an immigration file. We know for a fact that he doesn't have a U.S. birth certificate, and without that, the only way to legally live and work in the United States is via the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
If it's true that he acquired U.S. citizenship at birth through his mother, then the file would consist of a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America (CRBA). http://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/abroad/events-and-records/birth.html.
If such a document is in fact on file with the Statement Department, then we can at least say that he was a citizen at birth.
But no, that does not close the case. While there's certainly a good argument that "natural born citizen" means "citizen at birth", there are other arguments to the effect that if the purpose of the NBC clause was to prevent a President with divided loyalties, dual citizenship and natural born citizenship would be mutually exclusive categories, and it's not questioned that Cruz was a dual citizen until a bit more than two years ago.
I'd also like to say that for some of us, this issue as it related to Obama and now Cruz is far from just some wacky irrelevant technicality: the basic problem that America faces IMHO is the fact that we have traitors who have infested the highest levels of our government. Maybe not literal traitors actively fighting on the battlefield with our enemies, but traitors in the sense of people who place the interests of non-Americans above the interests of Americans; they don't place our security above our "international obligations", they don't defend our borders, they prioritize the needs of illegal aliens over those of American citizens, they sign international trade deals that decimate American industry, and on and on.
As it happens the Founders of our great nation were also quite concerned about this, having just fought a war for their independence not only against the British Crown, but also against the "Loyalists" who remained loyal to it following the Declaration of Independence. In yet another of their incredibly brilliant and prescient moves in crafting the Constitution, they embedded within it a clause that would (hopefully) ensure that at the highest level of our government, we would exclude those who might have divided loyalties, and even more IMHO, people who in the back of their minds might know that they would always have an "escape hatch" to avoid accountability to the American people by virtue of a latent claim to citizenship in a foreign country.
Yes, ultimately, a socialist traitor can come from anywhere, as can a constitutional conservative, but I don't see anything wrong with maintaining this one small measure of additional insurance against exactly the sort of traitorous, anti-American behavior and ideology that has been the hallmark of the Obama Administration.
Good question. I’m sure a 60 second perusal of his file would provide a conclusive answer.
Hold on a second. So you think anybody born on US soil is an NBC???
I doubt if the issue does wind up in court, calling the advocates of the position that Senator Cruz does not come under the eligibility clause “not jobs” will be an effective argument. Nor is it evidence of any real expertise on point.
...been beat to death already!
I really don’t know who is an NBC. I’d like to see a SCOTUS decision directly on point, or even a D.C. District Court judge. But I do know that the popular understanding of that clause is that it includes at a minimum those who were born on U.S. as U.S. citizens (and reserving the question of anchor babies for the debate about whether or not they are citizens at all, much less natural born citizens).
What file?
You think they were incompetent at issuing the Passport but kept good records?
Where did I say that I think they were incompetent at issuing the Passport?
I'd be satisfied with Ted Cruz answering the simple yes or no question... Did his mother apply for and become a Canadian citizen before he was born?
I'd prefer to get it straight from his mouth, and not from his spokesman. A year before he renounced his Canadian citizenship his spokeswoman was saying "To our knowledge, he never had Canadian citizenship."
Then what do you need to check?
1. Because most people understand NBC to mean “born on U.S. soil as a U.S citizen” (putting aside anchor babies for the moment), so it wouldn’t matter if his parents were citizens at the time of his birth;
2. Because there’s no reason to think that his parents ever lived outside of the U.S., much less gave up their citizenship in the process of doing so, unlike Cruz, whose parents we know for a fact were living outside of the U.S. for years before and after the time of his birth;
It's not, but the paper trail is officially recorded and traceable. It then becomes possible that the parents status can be determined.
It's how those ancestry sites work, they are gradually converting all birth and death records...official records of many types into digital information.
You do know that there are millions of people who are not by any argument natural born citizens holding U.S. passports, right?
I’d be satisfied with Ted Cruz answering the simple yes or no question... Did his mother apply for and become a Canadian citizen before he was born?
I’d prefer to get it straight from his mouth, and not from his spokesman. A year before he renounced his Canadian citizenship his spokeswoman was saying “To our knowledge, he never had Canadian citizenship.”
I am not sophisticated enough to “cut an paste” to FR, but...An interesting read can be found at Scribd.com/Cruz citizenship timeline. Pretty much lays out the chronology of events.
I went onto the thread to glean some info. When I come across comments like, “shut up you lying scrum,” it just underscores how unintentionally counterproductive candidates’ supporters can be.
I give up.
You have a great day.
God Bless.
So reminiscent of how things went down with respect to Obama’s birth certificate . . .
The current governing law is Title 8 section 1401. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401
Citing current law is mis-educating them. The meaning of "natural citizen" is not subject to man-made law, it is a consequence of "natural law."
Claiming Statute law decides what is natural law is no different from a Transgender deciding he is a woman.
Trump has released his Birth Certificate to the press.
You would trust his answer to that one question, but not everything he has said so far?
Why? Government has no authority over natural law, nor does the Constitution give it such authority. Do you seriously think at this day and age they would stick with Original Intent, or would it just be another tool in government's bag-o-tricks to erase our borders?
The only place the term natural born citizen has ever even been mentioned in a legislative act is the 1790 Naturalization Act, and they didn't even define it there. They just said children of citizens naturalized under the act that were born abroad were natural born citizens.
-----
Along with it's 3 exceptions, born in the country of citizen parents is the definition taught at the Texas high school I was attending while Cruz was being born in Canada.
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.