Posted on 02/15/2016 5:54:49 PM PST by mike70
've never started a thread (in 16 years), but I have a question for discussion.
Assume Ted Cruz is the Republican nominee. The Democrat candidate files lawsuits challenging Cruz's Natural Born Citizen status in two or more appellate districts. In one, the Court of Appeals rules that Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen and must appear on ballots. In another, the Court of Appeals rules that Cruz is not a Natural Born Citizen and cannot appear on ballots in that district.
Both cases are appealed to SCOTUS, but no replacement for Justice Scalia is nominated and confirmed. In both cases the Supreme Court splits 4-4. Would the matter revert to the decision of the Appeals Court so Cruz would be on the ballot in some states but not others.
To complicate the matter further, some states, California for example, span two appellate districts. If the decisions conflicted, Cruz would appear on some ballots in a state but not others.
What happens now?
I did not say anything other than an election board not a court decided in Illinois
You say Cruz is the most conservative candidate running. While on social issue he very well may be but what does he know about economics? How will he improve the workplace? The man has absolutely no qualification to enrich the business environment. His wife is a big time wall street executive.
We need a president that is QUALIFIED to get Americans back to work. If you think Cruz can do that then you might just as well vote for Clinton or Col Sanders.
The economy is this nations number one priority and I put my trust in Trump to get this right.
Canadian law is irrelevant to this discussion.
A citizen at birth is a natural born citizen and has never needed to be naturalized.
According to U.S.C Title 8 Section 1101 - Definitions (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101) subsection A part (23), the term “naturalization” ONLY occurs after being born. Thus a person who, by the circumstances of their birth is a citizen, and never needs to be naturalized.
It is organic to a nation state to define it’s boundaries as well as it’s citizens. Every nation does this. The US Constitution vests the authority to determine the rules of naturalization - which includes all rules, with Congress. This is specifically enumerated in Article I Section 8.
Thus Congress is vested with the authority to determine who are aliens and need to be naturalized in order to be a citizen. It also is vested with the authority to determine who is a citizen. Some are citizens via naturalization, some are citizens AT BIRTH (the at birth is important). Congress has addressed this issue by determining who is a citizen at birth. The current state of the law is addressed in Title 8 section 1401 - Citizens at birth (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401).
Under subsection A of that code, all who are born on US soil are US Citizens at birth and having never been naturalized are therefore natural born citizens
Under subsection G of that code (even the prior version), all who are born to at least one US citizen parent, as long as that parent has met the time requirements for residence inside the US, is also a citizen at birth. And like subsection A above, have never been naturalized and are therefore natural born citizens.
So, then, you’re stuck with the definition contained in the US Constitution and the English Common Law tradition upon which it was based. Even the Donald’s litigious blustering won’t change that.
Drumph would have a twitter tantrum then sue!!!
It is virtually impossible to be a natural born citizen of Canada and a natural born citizen of the United States. In what universe would that make sense?
The prosecutor would show evidence that Ted Cruz's mother naturalized as a Canadian citizen prior to Ted's birth; at a time when neither Canada nor the USA recognized dual citizenship; thus, Ted was born a Canadian citizen, solely.
Ted Cruz's team could respond with some evidence that he was naturalized as a US citizen some "x" years after his birth. He gets to keep his fraudulently acquired US Senate seat. Otherwise, he must be removed from the US Senate.
Regardless, Ted Cruz would not be eligible for the office of US president under any circumstances. Of course, that hasn't stopped odinga.
Ping to #19 video:
http://powderedwigsociety.com/eligibility-of-cruz-and-rubio/#
Pretty powerful and easy to understand presentation about Cruz and Rubio’s eligibility to run for POTUS.
His lack of NBC status will be irrelevant. Hillary will run non stop ads which won’t even need to lie to be devastating. He’ll be painted as a ultra right religious nut job on every late night comedy show. And then she’ll probably win every state in the general.
http://powderedwigsociety.com/eligibility-of-cruz-and-rubio/#
Pretty powerful and easy to understand presentation about Cruz and Rubio’s eligibility to run for POTUS.
— Maybe if you are a Democrat the rules change?
Sigh. Always.
Hopefully she will be indicted before that happens
What about the Congressional certification of the Electoral College vote?
If an objection is raised in writing. What happens then?
At least we don’t make it up as we go.
And what did I site as my sources in supporting my position? The relevant sections of the US Constitution and U.S Code.
And how did you respond? Did you provide a rebuttal? Or perhaps show via law, statute, code or constitution where your position was supported? Nope, all you did was resort to ad hominem.
How enlightening.
Trump will start a trade war with China, Russia and anyone else who crosses him.
He will also raise taxes as he has promised to do.
Cruz will lower taxes and this will encourage economic growth. Various economic experts have confirmed that Cruz’s economic plans will stimulate growth.
Trump is not a very good businessman. He would mismanage America the same way he mismanaged various businesses that declared bankruptcy. I understand how he used bankruptcy laws to enrich himself but I don’t want him to use America for that same purpose of self enrichment.
What is your LEGAL disagreement with the post #19 video?
Links also please.
Thanks in advance.
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.