Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: South Dakota

“Cruz is a citizen because his mother is but he is not a NBC because his father was not a US citizen at the time of his birth”

Because Cruz’s citizenship was conveyed naturally from his mother, he is naturally a born citizen. The founders understood the natural right of children to receive the citizenship of their parents. That is what the natural part of the phrase means.


63 posted on 02/07/2016 7:48:21 PM PST by unlearner (RIP America, 7/4/1776 - 6/26/2015, "Only God can judge us now." - Claus Von Stauffenberg / Valkyrie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: unlearner

No.Supreme Court precedent: The courts have applied the partus sequitur patrem principle (citizenship by descent from one’s father) to determine who is, or who is not, a federal (U.S.) citizen at birth; but the meaning of natural born citizen appears to be a separate issue [21]. To this day, the Supreme Court, in its majority opinions, has consistently used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to persons born on U.S. soil, to parents who are both U.S. citizens.

In Scott v. Sandford (1856), Justice Daniel’s concurring opinion characterized, as unexceptionable (beyond criticism or objection), the Vattelian Law of Nations view of citizenship, which includes:
“natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens” (Scott v. Sandford, 1856)
In Minor v. Happersett (1874), children born in the United States were divided into two groups: (a) U.S.-born children of U.S.-citizen parents, and (b) all other U.S.-born children, regardless of their parents’ citizenship. The Court used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to members of the first group [22].
In Perkins v. Elg (1939), the Supreme Court referred to Marie Elizabeth Elg as a natural born citizen. She was born in the United States; her father was a U.S. citizen by naturalization, and her mother was a U.S. citizen by marriage [23].
In Kwock Jan Fat v. White (1920), the Supreme Court referred to Mr. Kwock as a natural born citizen. He was born in the United States; his father was a native-born U.S. citizen; and his mother was a U.S. citizen by marriage [24].
To this day, whenever an Opinion of the Supreme Court has referred to an individual as a “natural born citizen”, the individual was always born in the United States, of U.S.-citizen parents. The Supreme Court has never, in any of its majority opinions, used the term “natural born citizen” in reference to someone whose parents were not both U.S. citizens


64 posted on 02/07/2016 8:04:50 PM PST by South Dakota (Two US citizen parents not one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson