Posted on 02/05/2016 6:38:54 AM PST by raptor22
Donald Trump, his aura of invincibility shattered by Iowa caucus voters he once called “stupid,†is throwing a tantrum these days, convinced that Ted Cruz “cheated†and continues to maintain the untenable proposition that in any event he is a not eligible to be President of the United States.
Cruz did not cheat in Iowa. Cruz supporters may have indeed cited to supporters of Dr. Ben Carson CNN news reports and tweets that Carson was skipping New Hampshire and South Carolina, so draw your own conclusions, but where were the Carson president captains to shepherd their flock?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The point is Sir Winston was NOT a citizen. No different then Mr. Cruz. No different at all.
Don't know but judging by your #24, glad to have your clear thinking.
NBC equals born in a foreign country to a foreign parent clearly defies the rules of logic doesn't it?
So currently, the children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. are considered citizens.
Do you agree that illegal aliens have the right to pick who our citizenry will be?
They go through no "naturalization process". They just present the BC to the State Department and voila...they is The Americans.
Do you believe that?
The central question about being a Natural Born Citizen is loyalty. The European Monarchs routinely intermarried, swapped thrones and pranced around Europe making sure that only their gang would be in power...no matter whose country it was.
The Founders knew about that and made sure to prevent it.
If someone born elsewhere with one non-citizen parent is supposedly a "natural born citizen", why would Madison have bothered to carve out a special class within the Constitution? Such a person fits the profile exactly of a child born to a head of state who marries a foreigner in a marriage of political convenience.
You can make the argument that the shoe doesn't fit in Ted's case. His father at least became a citizen, but he let 40 years pass before he did so. It appears that his heart is still in Cuba, and with the Spanish Main. But he appreciates what the U.S. did for him, so he finally swore in.
That's nice. But uh, that's the sort of watered down loyalty that um...we're concerned with.
Ted will make a fabulous Senate Majority Leader. The schemer that he replaces will skulk off to his Kentucky redoubt to enjoy the millions he extorted. Good Riddance.
But we have millions of people still here who have only distant connections to foreign lands and peoples, and their loyalty is not under question.
For those legal eagles here, the point is this: a true NBC is a citizen both by Jus Soli and Jus Sanguinis. As we all know, Vattel took that a step further and said that the Jus Soli part had to include both parents.
It's not a heavy constraint. In Obama's case, it was violated, and we see in his racist xenophilia the consequences: he hates us, and imports those who he is really loyal to, while surrendering to their cruel overlords (think "Iran").
The difference between men and women in relation to the birth process is a real one, and the principle of equal protection does not forbid Congress to address the problem at hand in a manner specific to each gender.
If one adopts the dissent's argument, the best Nguyen could have obtained was naturalized citizenship. Valentine starts with a kook premise, then just builds layers of kookery on top of his original flawed analysis and conclusion.
Citizenship is questionable. Natural Born Citizenship is not. Cruz (and Rubio) are not Natural Born Citizens.
His citizenship was granted through statute by the Naturalization Laws. His mother had to submit a CRBA, a naturalization process, to claim his US citizenship at birth.
Citizenship granted by Naturalization Laws = Naturalized Citizen
Have you not noticed, we agree :0)
Such a person is a citizen of that, and only that, country without question, since there are no other options based upon his/her birth.
The term "Natural Born Citizen" is used to describe this type of exclusive citizenship.
If that is not the case, then the circumstances of that person's birth are covered under the Naturalization laws and that person is a naturalized citizen.
As Ted Cruz's birth circumstances are covered under the Naturalization laws, therefore Ted Cruz is a naturalized American citizen, not a natural born American citizen.
As a "check your work" review, Ted has one or more options for his citizenship in addition to that of his place of birth.
A natural born citizen has no options or additional choices for citizenship other than place of birth.
Easy!
The way I see it, the court system is part of the problem. It is no more legitimate than the usurper president and derelict congress.
I thought congress had the final say in this matter, not the courts. With nobama, didn’t the dems in congress (pelosi, reid, etc.) certify that he was eligible?
Isn’t it terrible!
I so love a good argument!
;)
I hoped Cruz could resolve this too. All he does is make jokes.
I deeply resent the way these two interlopers are making a mockery of our Constitution and the generations of real Americans who have died to protect it...
I would argue that it takes more than an act of congress or a court decision to change the Constitution.
At the time of the framing and ratification of the Constitution citizenship was passed from the father to his children.
Changing the Constitution from what the framers intended to what the popular opinion of the day happens to be still requires that the processes of Article 5 be followed. Congress alone nor the Courts have the power to alter the Constitution.
Were it otherwise the Constitution would be meaningless.
Not exactly, or not the only criteria, that's for sure. The words of the constitution and the entire body of US case law assigns 100% or birth abroad as aliens under the constitution, naturalized as Congress sees fit. The scope of that "Congress sees fit" is highly variable over the years. Nothing "natural" about it.
As far as amendment being necessary to change the constitution, that is demonstrably false. The government isn't bound by the constitution, unless you are a Pollyanna. The NBC clause is long dead. There is no need to amend it, just keep ignoring it.
The constitution IS meaningless - or rather, it means whatever the government gets away with and SCOTUS either ignores or endorses.
One can review the case law for academic curiosity purposes - or if money or some other thing of value hangs in the balance, to facilitate composing arguments. But the decisions are a figment of whatever 5 justices ate for breakfast. The US is a banana republic, in every sense.
Neither the congress nor the courts have the final say; it is a constitutional matter.
The congress and the courts can not change the constitution outside of the Article 5 process.
The congress has the power to change the naturalization process in Article 2 this does not allow them to change the meaning of Natural Born Citizen or change the qualifications of the president.
A pessimistic view with a basis in truth.
I however am unwilling to permit this reality to continue with my consent. I choose to resist.
The other day Rush said “a court had ruled”! In Ill. My head was about to bust.
We could make a Monty Python skit out of it! I work in the argument department. But, you time is up. ; )
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.