Posted on 01/11/2016 3:03:26 PM PST by Kaslin
My youngest was born in a Canadian Hospital in 1971. Both of us (her parents) lived just across the border in the USA.
We were told that even though she was an American citizen from birth, as we were “natural born American citizens”, that she would not be eligible to run for President of the USA.
What has changed since 1971? How can my daughter not be a “natural born citizen” since she was born in Ontario, and Cruz be eligible when one parent was a Cuban, and one an American living in Canada at the time.
We were not living in Canada when out daughter was born, and I was only in Canada for her birth and the next day in the hospital. My husband went home to our house just across the border every night.
These things really annoy me, and I want to know what is fact vs what is propaganda.
And just to prove HOW even handed I am, I first started in on this aspect when Obama was running in the Dem primaries.
If your son was born in an American military hospital and not in a civilian hospital in Germany, than it’s just like as if he was born on American soil. Both my son were born in in the same American military hospital 7 years apart. We also had to register them.
This whole “natural born” vs. “native born” argument needs settled, and needs a court decision now. So fed up with all the arguments, and some so unnecessarily hostile. Cruz, put up or shut up. His own college teachers say it is not settled law...so puleeeeze get the recommended declaratory relief from the courts. It certainly looks like Cruz, who knows the Constitution inside out, is avoiding the issue because he fears a court ruling will find him ineligible. He needs to man up and put all our fears to rest..
Could you elaborate on Madison’s opinion of a natural born citizen is?
I cannot because I don’t know it.
There is no information as to why they changed it in the 1795 Act. Charles Gordon came up with some theories in his Law Review Article in 1968.
There were still Founding Fathers in Congress in 1795. But I view Madison as THE Founding Father.
Personally, I think he took it out because he knew they made a mistake. I do believe the fact that it was taken out is germane and can’t figure out why people just ignore that it was taken out.
But that is just my opinion worth absolutely nothing.
Madison was a federalist. I suspect had I been around then I'd have been an ardent anti-federalist so this I'm ok if I occasionally end up on the other side of an issue.
Why do people say it’s a move by Trump?? Trump responded to questions from reporters, that is where it started. So it’s the media that brought it up.
Minor V Happersett disappeared off the ‘Net in 2008.
It’s back.
Trump is presumably not being prompted by reporters to bring it up at his rallies. Reporters bring up embarrassing stuff about Trump. Does he repeat them at his rallies?
No they didn't. They acknowledged there was a legal difference of opinion as to what an NBC was, then stated they didn't have to decide, because the plaintiff, being born in the USA with citizen parents was an NBC under any definition, so the point was moot.
Unfortunately, there is nothing that can be found (that I know of) in the records that pertains to why Madison took that action.
All we know is that he took that action and removed the definition.
No, the Supreme Court has not ruled on the issue, and as frustrating as it may be to those who think Obama not to be a citizen, no federal court is going to touch it. All who brought suit to challenge Obama were said to have no standing. Practically the issue can be raised only when Congress has to certify the electoral vote. Then the other candidates can ask Congress not to certify the outcome. For those who think that Cruz is not a “natural-born†citizen, they are free not to vote for him. If his opponents can raise enough doubt in the minds of enough people, then the question of his eligibility will never come forth. But anyone who thinks that a Republican Congress will not support a Republican winner, is really naive.
“If he was a citizen at birth then he is a natural born citizen.”
Then so was Obama.
Anchor babies are birthed in order to provide their parents with the possibility of future legal permanent residence in the US. Since Rubio's parents were already legal permanent residents aka Green Card holders at the time of his birth, Rubio was by definition not an anchor baby.
Wrong. The court acknowledged there is a difference of opinion on what an NBC is, then specifically said the plaintiff was an NBC under any definition, so they didn’t need to rule as to which is correct. That is not a precedent.
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.