WaPo (Op-Ed): Ted Cruz Not Eligible

Washington Post ^ | January 12, 2016 | Mary Brigid McManamon

[Behind the Blue Wall]

Donald Trump is actually right about something: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is not a natural-born citizen and therefore is not eligible to be president or vice president of the United States.

The Constitution provides that "No person except a natural born citizen . . . shall be eligible to the office of President." The concept of "natural born" comes from the common law, and it is that law the Supreme Court has said we must turn to for the concept's definition. On this subject, the common law is clear and unambiguous. The 18th-century English jurist William Blackstone, the preeminent authority on it, declared natural-born citizens are "such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England," while aliens are "such as are born out of it."

. . .

Cruz is, of course, a U.S. citizen. As he was born in Canada, he is not natural born. His mother, however, is an American, and Congress has provided by statute for the naturalization of children born abroad to citizens. Because of the senator's parentage, he did not have to follow the lengthy naturalization process that aliens without American parents must undergo. Instead, Cruz was naturalized at birth.

[Liz]

INSIGHTFUL ANALYSIS DESERVES A REPEAT Cruz is a citizen but he CANNOT be considered a natural born citizen; he is a citizen by statute.

His birth in Canada indicates he has THREE countries (The US via his mother, Canada his birthplace, and Cuba thru his father) having a legitimate claim on his allegiance from birth, whether he wanted it or not.

Our constitution and the rule of law must prevail. We should not yield to the same dark impulses of expediency and delusion that gave us the tyrannical sociopathic usurper demagogue Obama.

Choosing candidates who are creatures of the cult of personality has proved disastrous.

[RummyChick]

If anyone wants to see the 1000 post thread from 2013 on this topic

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3084995/posts

[lepton]

That Canada chose to also bestow citizenship on him, without any request on his part, is an irrelevant part of this argument.

[hoosiermama]

The only person with standing (harmed) would have been Hillary. He bought her off with DoS

ANy of the current candidates who place under him. Maybe Random PAUL. He certainly could be considered a supporter of constitution
Trump is giving Cruz a chance to save face.
But remember if Cruz is said to not qualify it opens up BHO too.

[bgill]

Obama’s so called election was bought and paid for. Remember, McCain was vetted in the SR511 and Obama and Hillary both agreed to the definition of NBC as being born on US soil of two American citizen parents. Obama was never vetted.

I’m a Texan and would like to vote for Cruz but will not. He is not a NBC. He was 1) not born on US soil and 2) his father wasn’t an American citizen. I’m fine with him holding public office but not POTUS.

[cloudmountain]

Had Cruz been born in 1921 under the identical birth circumstances that he was born into in 1970, than he would not even have been a US citizen. The Cable Act, passed in 1922, allowed a US citizen woman, married to a foreign national and who gives birth in a foreign country, to transmit US citizenship onto the newborn child for the first time.
Article II, Section I clause 5, was ratified in 1791 with the rest of the constitution, long before the Cable Act.. Article I has not been modified by any subsequent amendment. Accordingly, the original intent and meaning of Article II stands absent any such constitutional amendment.
The purpose of Article II, Section I clause 5 was to prevent undue foreign influence on the office of the presidency, PARTICULARLY thru a father owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. The framers took their definition for NBC from Emmerich De Vattel Law of Nations, the 212th paragraph of which was quoted in its entirety in the 1814 Venus Merchantman SCOTUS decision. The Law of Nations is referred to in Article I of the constitution. That definition referred to an NBC as being born of two citizen parents and born on the soil of the nation. That definition was cited in the 1868 case of Minor vs Hapersett, and Wong Kim Ark vs US. De Vattel has been cited and accepted in dozens of SCOTUS and federal lower court rulings. The framers were patriarchs who believed that the citizenship of the children followed the citizenship of the father.
The authors of the 14th amendment, Senators Howard Jacob and Rep. Bingham also defined an NBC in similar terms.
Obama is the very embodiment and personification of the REASON that the framers put those protections into the constitution. By ignoring it, we have opened ourselves to the anti American and unconstitutional tyranny that Obama poses to our constitutional republic.
Ted Cruz is head and shoulders the best candidate in the race. He is a patriot who loves this country and its people. He is intellectually and philosophically superior to ANYONE else in the race. As much as I admire him, He CANNOT be considered a natural born citizen, as he is a citizen by statute. He was born with THREE countries (The US, Canada, and Cuba thru his father) having a legitimate claim on his allegiance from birth, whether he wanted it or not. I believe in the constitution and the rule of law, NOT in the cult of personality. We should not yield to the same dark impulses of expediency and delusion that gave us the tyrannical sociopathic usurper demagogue Obama.

Ted Cruz: full name:
Rafael Edward Cruz: was born in Calgary, Canada, in 1970. His family was living there because his father was working for the petroleum industry at the time. They moved when he was four. Cruz grew up in Texas and graduated from high school there, later attending Princeton University and Harvard Law School.

From Google regarding the requirements for being POTUS:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident.

Bottom line:
His mother was American. His father was Cuban and HE worked for the petroleum business in Canada.
Cruz DID live in the USA the necessary amount of time. Princeton and Harvard graduate as well.
He IS eligible.

The underline is MINE.

[Yosemitest]

Yes I do, but that still does NOT CHANGE the United States Supreme Court Rulings on "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" .

Here's the supporting article from Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow in constitutional studies and editor-in-chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review.
Like most immigrants, he does a job Americans won't: defending the Constitution.

Yes, Ted Cruz Can be President
August 26, 2013., by Ilya Shapiro

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."

The Naturalization Act of 1790, let's read it , too, SINCE IT WAS WRITTEN BY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS !

United States Congress, "An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" (March 26, 1790).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled,

That any Alien being a free white person,
who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years,
may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States
wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least,
and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court  that
he is a person of good character,
and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law
to support the Constitution of the United States,
which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer,
and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon;
and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. 


And the children of such person so naturalized,
dwelling within the United States,
being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization,
shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. 

And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States,
shall be considered as natural born Citizens: 
Provided, that
the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: 
Provided also, that
no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid,
except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

[Liz]

Amen.

[Yosemitest]

WRONG !
Read comment #167 !

[Badboo]

Agreed but why is it so hard for some to grasp the fact that the draft was purposely changed to add the word natural before born? Do they believe the founders who were so exact and careful were in this case just messing around?

It is not that Ted Cruz is not a loyal citizen, but that another country, at the time of his birth could claim his allegiance.

In the colonial times of courts and kings and heredity, intrigue was rife and this was for Jay ( who had great experience in the manners and matters of Europe) exactly why he proposed the Constitution guard against this in the office of the chief executive.

Some might say that today this is quaint and unnecessary, and say so even after the damage and destruction of the second usurper and current occupier.

We waste words here among those who choose politics over truth. Shortly, they will learn that politics is a cutting instrument and there are many on the usurper’s side who will pull their swords and hack away on T. Cruz should he be nominated.

[SubMareener]

Sorry, the proper underlining is: a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution. Ted Cruz was not alive in 1790.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

WRONG !

Why do you capitalize "wrong" for? Did you think it might fool people into believing you're right?

[itsahoot]

Why is it so hard to understand that if you are born to an American, you are an American citizen from Birth?

Maybe because it is unadulterated B$. Do you not think the country in which you were born may have something to say about your citizenship?

[Timber Rattler]

Which the boss himself just settled yesterday...

"Cruz is eligible."

29 posted on 1/11/2016, 10:13:24 PM by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to to God!)

[skeeter]

I do believe in the Constitution. The Constitution says Cruz is a citizen.

[Yosemitest]

In order to train a Jack@$$, FIRST you have to get lots attention !

[Yosemitest]

In order to train a Jack@$$, FIRST you have to get its attention !

[Mollypitcher1]

Law of Nations, 1758 law book
defines “natural born citizen”

The Law of Nations, used by the framers of our Constitution

was published in 1758 and was used as a college text book in America from c1770 on. Ben Franklin received three copies of the French edition in 1775 to be used by the Continental Congress, one for himself, one given to the library, and one sent to Massachusetts from the editor Dumas. Documented FACT.

Section #212, in Book 1 Chapter 19
thereof, which deals with defining “natural born” citizenship.

Chapter 19, Book 1,Ӥ 212.

” The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in
the country, of parents who are citizens.”

Note PARENTS....plural, meaning both parents. Ted Cruz’s father was Cuban, then became Canadian long before becoming American.

[RummyChick]

Just an opinion. That is all it is from anyone.

Scalia indicated TWICE Jus Soli may be required. You can’t ignore that nor the fact that Justice Thomas said they are evading whether someone born in Puerto Rico can run for POTUS

[nomad]

Please check comment 137, it`s a well reasoned, and sincerely held belief. We are by natural law birth right, free and sovereign individuals. But this concept was derived via the ever evolving concept OF the individual. If we make that concept static, then we forgo that process of evolution that ultimately gave it to us.

For good or bad, evolution is at the very heart of life itself. A similar process, in the evolution of the concept of Man and his place in the universe, brought us to the natural law derived concept of the sovereign individual, and thus, gave us the Republic it birthed. I will never surrender this concept of the right to decide, to do so undermines the very basis of the practical implementation of our freedom.