Posted on 01/18/2016 9:50:00 AM PST by Red Steel
Obama is not eligible.
Huh????
I’ve given you sources from Harvard which summarize the law. Cornell and the US Govt Dept of State website both confirm the Harvard summary.
I’m done with ya. You just want to argue and don’t really care what the law says.
Obozo “seized power” because all too many conservatives were too lazy or distracted or ill informed to follow up on his radical roots, radical friends and radical commitments and go toe to toe with the pathetic treasonweasel lest anyone accuse them of insensitivity or, gulp. racism. The flatout political weenyism and political pacifism of investor class Republicans helped and the supine campaigns of trash like McCain and Romney sealed the deal.
Ok Sorry, I was a smart ass. Nothing will ever convince you folks and I’m done trying.
You don’t want the truth, you want your opinions confirmed. Im not in that business.
Apology accepted, thanks.
I am not asking to have my “opinions confirmed,”..my opinion doesn’t matter to anyone but me.
The issue is quite simple..Cruz wants my vote, and yours.
I’m merely asking him to verify that he is indeed qualified to assume the office of the President of our country.
So far, all we have gotten is jive from Cruz..not very re-assuring..
We were hustled by obamalama, ain’t gonna happen again..As we say in Oklahoma, “This ain’t rocket surgery, or sumpn’ like that”
As a nation of laws, the content of google is not authoritative. It can be a useful tool to help find something authoritative, but as you readily admitted, there isn’t much to go on.
If you believe that congress can not define what is not present in the constitution, then you cannot believe in the rule of law. The only other options is really rule by justice since there are many documents and the answer can depend on which document is cherry picked.
I reject your premise, and absence an agreement on that... there is not ground to debate on. We simply disagree.
Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco in about 1871 of Chinese citizen parents who were legally present in the US. Cruz was born in Canada of an American mother and a Cuban father. Apples and oranges.
Cruz's has claimed to follow ‘original intent’ and ‘natural born’ birthright is NOT given by any Court or Congressional act. Cruz is NOT natural born and nobody can make him natural born. I owe him nothing. But as a lawyer, did Cruz take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution? What did his Senate oath say?
We the people in order to form ..... No court or Congress has touched the law.. they ignored it with Obama but they did not change it.
In take it that you have a provision of the constitution that says that only the father and not the mother can pass citizenship to the child born abroad. No court would uphold that provision as rational distinction. What we really don’t need are people claiming to be conservative substituting their unsupported fantasies as part of the constitution.
“I think GOPe planned all along to take Cruz out at the convention, and use his delegates for Jeb or Rubio or some other establishment hack. No court case needed, the GOP has the authority, on its own, to disqualify Cruz.”
Following that line of thought. If the GOPe adopted the NBC definition referenced by Senator Cruz during the debates that “both parents were born in the United States.”. That eliminates Trump, Rubio and Cruz...
Is that the scenario where Yeb! wins the nomination?
Then the last seven years of national nightmare did not really happen? I am soooooo relieved. I thought that the Islamocommie treasonweasel had been ruling us all those years.
Philosophically, I agree that our rights come from our creator. Unfortunately for your argument however, the declaration of independence did not establish the framework for our country. The constitution did, and that constitution did not make the same reference.
If you were to present a legal theory in court based on nothing but the preamble to the declaration of independence, but not grounded in the constitution... it would be thrown out. We are a nation of law.
And that is how I will respond to the rest of your nonsense about what you think you owe whoever, oaths and other grandstanding. Throw it out and ignore it.
Sure, and if it adopted a rule that one's great grandparents had to be citizens, with an unbroken chain of US citizenship on both sides of the blood line up to the candidates birth, they'd be disqualified too.
Just saying, the GOPe would follow the rule of law that is actually in place, not some rule of law that is made up out of whole cloth.
Cruz is easily disqualified. It is trivial.
I am no authority on GOP party rules but I know they have been guilty of a great deal of mischief in recent years to deny any but Wall Street/K Street approved quislings the GOP nomination. People who know what they have done are hereby encouraged to educate us on the GOP-E mischief.
Trump is doing a great job of marketing. He’s distracting from the issues using hyperbole, vulgarity and attacks. He certainly isn’t addressing any issues in a meaningful way.
His typical way of delivering ‘meaningful’ insight on an issues is to say “he’s terrible†or something equally inane.>>> well to call most of what our government is doing is terrible is brilliant. He seems to point out many specifics and on the negotiations, he points out how we lose on all of them.
He has a very specific 2nd amendment policy which i like
He has a very detailed veterans policy, which i like Big issue Brings it up every speech.
he has a very specific immigration policy which i like. big issue brings it up every speech
he has a tax policy which is doable and like the reagan big plan i would prefer a retail sales tax only but that would never happen. big issue brings it up every speech
He wants to repeal and replace the current obama care with a more business and patient friendly version (which i think he has detailied in one of his books)
he doesn’t recite the details in speeches which would bore the pants off everyone in the room.
he has recited disdain for SCOTUS roberts. which i agree with
He has declared a war on islam which i agree with. Only candidate who has done that and has been denounced by the entire government employee class federal and local. but these are only the specifics that i have heard and read. Cruz’s website has his resume so you have to read the details, cannot tell if the bills introduced are good or bad.
Time will tell. It is going to be an interesting 2016.
I have presented arguments in courts based on the Declaration and they were rejected outright. All too often our judges are craven Tories long after the Revolution.
I am breaking in a new computer, from windows to apple... so my cut and paste skills are greatly wanting.
It is not my fantasies that are at work. I happen to accept the Constitutional requirement of ‘original intent’ that requires ‘natural born’ status for holding the office of president. Cruz took an oath to defend and protect the Constitution, and I think he is obligated to keep his word. He has no Constitutional right to play fast and loose when it suits his personal ambitions.
To date no court or Congress has touched the Constitutional requirements for holding the office of president. But hey, Cruz just might be the ticket Larry Tribe has been hunting.
These that think they are showing intellect of bring up Trump’s eligibility because of his mother are willingly ignorant. Trump was born in the US to a natural born citizen father and a mother citizen.
Trump is not the issue... Cruz has the eligibility problem and he knows it.
You have to consider the forum. For a philosophical argument, the Declaration is great. For a legal argument, the constitution is more appropriate.
BlackElk, we do concur. JMT, just as BlackElk says, raising Tribe and the Living Constitution ogre is a straw man tactic. Tribe and the Living Constitution crowd, as popularly understood, are legal positivists, not originalists of any flavor.
A legal positivist says that law is whatever the lawmakers of today say it is, that it has no transcendent foundation in natural law, that rights can be created or revoked by men because they do not come from the Creator. Documents like constitutions are the enemy of the positivist, because they lock in legal principles that may not be popular with today’s legal elite. The MO of the positivist is circumvention, not understanding, of the Constitutional text.
This is not at all what I believe, though I am confident Tribe is in that camp. What Tribe has tried to do is paint Cruz as a hypocrite for believing he is eligible because, according to Tribe, an originalist must believe that the Constitution commits us to a specific definition of NBC, namely, natural born citizenship requires birth on US soil and two citizen parents.
But even among originalists, there are significant difference in perspective, and Tribe, Harvard law professor absolutely has to know this. The text of the Constitution does not define NBC, and there is a significant body of evidence to suggest that children born out of country to a citizen parent would indeed have been able to claim NBC status during the years immediately following the ratification of the US Constitution. As for original intent, the evidence I have seen suggests the term was included, not to exclude born American children, but to defeat the political interloping of adult persons of foreign royalty and commitment, specific figures like Prince Henry, or Fredrick, Duke of York, etc.
So it’s simply not factal to say that someone is not an originalist if they don’t treat Vattell’s definition as equal to the constitutional text. It’s precisely because we DO care what the Constitution says that we don’t want secondary sources like Vattell given that level of authority. We have a deliberative process, and can write in greater detail how we shall recognize the various categories of citizenship. And if that proves inadequate, we have an amendatory process. If anyone thinks the Constitution does not go far enough in defining natural born citizen, then let them push for an amendment that would clarify the issue.
Peace,
SR
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.