Posted on 01/15/2016 7:37:32 AM PST by RoosterRedux
To: RoosterRedux
-- Do you think that if Trump wins the nomination he could bring sufficient pressure and influence to get McConnell to change? And if McConnell changed, what would be the next step? --
Action in the Senate is a non-starter. I had an epiphany a few minutes ago. I'll share it.
Whether Cruz is NBC or not doesn't matter, not in the least. What matters is that the Canada BC creates a vector of plausible doubt. How, in the election process is this doubt resolved? At first, in the states.
Trump is 100% right. In the general election, in every state that Cruz as Pres or VP wins, there WILL be a lawsuit. The loser in an election has an absolute right to sue on eligibility grounds, regardless of the margin or loss.
So, the political issue is, does the party want to run an election that gets decided by 20 or 30 lawsuits? Before or after the voters voted doesn't matter so much - just changes how the general election is influenced by court decisions, which could well go against Cruz. Trump said, hey, 5% chance Cruz loses. Do you want to go to war with that risk?
Yes, there is a con-law issue in there too. But either the GOP "sues itself" in the primary, which flat out WONT happen, Cruz is certified qualified in all the states, so no challenge on eligibility is possible; leaving the alternative, lawsuits in the general.
We're stuck with that. Lawsuits in the general are dead certain, if Cruz is the nominee.
121 posted on 1/15/2016, 10:15:45 AM by Cboldt
:: It would be messy ::
Maybe but then, maybe not. The litigant/plaintiff is required to prove damages.
A court might rule that once a person enters a political campaign, there can be no damages in an electoral loss.
“Article I Section 8 specifically enumerates Congress with authority over the rules of naturalization. Despite your wishful thinking, there is no other authority in the Constitution and the Amendments. That is it, done, full stop, period. If Congress wants to grant natural born citizenship to all red heads born in this world regardless of parentage, culture, location or heritage, it can do so.”
With that irrational and demented comment you have succeeded in achieving the distinction of behaving like a willful ignoramus and a nutjob by falsely denying the literal definitions of the words, “natural” and “naturalization.” So, henceforth you’ll be dismissed as a crank , who has chosen not deny the reality of the written definitions.
The Florida Legislature was prepared to appoint a slate of Republican Electors. There was no way Gore could have gone to the January 3, 2001 Special Joint Session with 271 uncontested electoral votes.
So, it did not matter what SCOFLA did. The power to choose electors rests with the Legislature.
At most, there would have been two slates of Florida Electors submitted to the Secretary of State and transmitted to the President of the Senate.
The Special Joint Session would have had to resolve the issue. Given a Republican majority in that session, the Republican Electors from Florida could not have been disallowed without disallowing the Democrat Electors as well.
So - either Congress would have accepted the Legislature’s Electors and not SCOFLA’s, giving Bush a 271-266 win, or Florida’s electors would not have been counted, leaving a 246-266 unsuccessful election, and the House, with a 30-20 Republican split in State delegations would have elected Bush.
Gore had no path to victory, whatever SCOFLA did or did not do.
The act in force at the time of birth controls. When that doesn’t satisfy political desires resort must be had to acts repealed centuries ago. And when even that is not enough those acts can be carefully mixed with other acts producing a new act, an act never passed by Congress.
Dismembering repealed naturalization acts and carefully selecting phrases from the entrails is not law, it’s voodoo.
The Voodoo Naturalization Act of 2016
Any child born beyond Sea, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such child may or may not have been a citizen of the United States, shall be considered as a natural born citizen of the United States.
By the power vested in Ted Cruz as ruler of his world, and pursuant to the Voodoo Naturalization Act of 2016, Ted Cruz declares himself to be a natural born citizen of the United States.
If the state lawsuits materialize, SCOTUS may then be compelled to rule to settle contradictory state decisions.
The first one to resort to name calling loses the debate.
If you want to try and salvage your arguments and positions, try using the Constitution or the Amendments to show where the authority of Congress to establish the rules of naturalization are limited rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks.
Oh and since I have already referenced the 14th amendment re-establishing jus soli as justification for citizenship, you can’t use that.
You’re like Bill Clinton attempting to argue that day is night and night is day and the definition of is. You obviously have no clue about the definitions of the words you are using, much less the Constitution using those words. In other words, you are wasting my time with noob errors that have no place in a reasoned discussion. You can kick and carry on all you want, but I am out of patience with people who choose not to respect my time and efforts. You have an obligation to respect the usage of the words that are the foundation of the issue under discussion. Come back when you can demonstrate a valid understanding of what the words and word phrases such as “natural”, “natural law”, and naturalization” actually mean. I have spent the years since 1964 researching these terminologies and their usage, so I don’t need you to come here with a bunch of juvenile taunts and negligence of the legal terminology to waste my time and energy better spent on my personal affairs and to help friends and opponents who have a genuine and respectful desire to learn from debating actual conflicts in the issues versus beginner errors and neglectful ignorance that waste everyone’s time and energies. If you are offended by this blunt dismissal of your errant nonsense, tough. We have more qualified opponents to waste our time in debate over issues that are real conflicts.
Since you will not or can not use the Constitution to support your position and are only resorting name calling , there is no further need for “debate”.
“Since you will not or can not use the Constitution to support your position and are only resorting name calling , there is no further need for “debateâ€.”
There was no debate to begin with, because you demonstrated that you have no valid comprehension of the words being used, in particular “naturalization”, “natural”, and “natural law”. Now, here you are once again trying to use juvenile taunts, instead of acting like a responsible adult and making the effort to comprehend and use the actual and proper definitions for those terms. You are wasting an opportunity to have a useful discussion of the issue with someone who has extensive knowledge and experience from researching this subject over a period of decades. Instead, you are wasting everyone’s time with these juvenile playground taunts. As I said, come back when you can demonstrate the ability to hold up your end of the debate with something remotely resembling comprehension of the words and phrases used in the Constitution and legislative acts.
In all fairness, Cruz should’ve cleared up this issue definitively, complete with paperwork from the Powers-That-Be, before he announced. Questions about his eligibility have been floating around for years. He knew it would come up. He needed to get his ducks in a row to avoid all of this turmoil, the arguing, etc. But he didn’t. Why?
I called my Senators. I asked them where they stood on the question. I explained the question, cited the parts of the constitution, cited Rogers v. Bellei, and said I thought Cruz was not qualified. But, that said, I don't want to have the Senator reach the same conclusion I do, just because I do. My questions were, Is Cruz qualified? And if the issue is before Congress in the form of electoral votes, will the Senator acquiesce that Cruz is NBC, or will there be a challenge and debate? I asked for a letter, because I will be voting in the primary, and Cruz's eligibility, as viewed by Congress, is important to me.
If enough people do this, and the letters are made public, it facilitates resolving the issue before the people vote.
“These pretzels are making me thirsty”
Do you suppose should Trump be elected, he could still appoint Cruz as his V.P. and just suffer through how long it took for the Supreme Court to vote on itNO! Why should he do that? That's crazy talk. This isn't charity.
You are resorting to a "popular" framework for your argument, that has no basis in law.
But nevermind that, even if your mind is made up, the point I made in the OP is valid. This issue will be litigated if Cruz becomes the nominee, and the litigation is likely (certain, unless by an activist court) to conclude that Cruz is a naturalized citizen, and then what?
Article I Section 8 of the Constitution EXCLUSIVELY enumerates the power over the rules of naturalization to Congress. That includes who needs to be naturalized and who is naturally born a citizen.
Other than the 14th amendment restraining that authority by re-instating jus soli as justification for citizenship, there is no restriction on Congress’s authority. Those are the facts. Disagree with them if you want to but you can’t change the fact that Congress has exclusive authority to define what ever it wants to with regards to NBC status.
And the current expression of that authority is Title 8 Section 1401 of the US which defines those who are citizens at birth and do not need to be naturalized, i.e. naturally born citizens.
There is no restriction on the power to naturalize.
I'm not going to argue with you. We're both fixed in our positions. If it would make you feel better if I said, "you're right," go ahead and run with that. I'll just come back and claim that my power to say you re right creates the power to say you are wrong, and therefore you are wrong.
Well played, sir.
lol
What Our Framers Knew: The Constitution, Vattel, and ‘Natural Born Citizen’
Well Trayvon,
I know you are embarrassed that Trump got beaten last night in the debate on this issue. hearing all those South Carolina voters booing him repeatedly was properly causing you to nearly choke on your skittles.
But there is little point in trying to compensate for that failure here on FR.
I am sure he will still find a way to gain the attention you both so desperately crave.
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.