Posted on 02/19/2016 6:36:53 AM PST by Enlightened1
Here is what the Constitution says about who can be president:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The problem is the Constitution doesn't define "natural born Citizen." Neither does any current law. And no one has ever brought a court case to decisively settle the question as a matter of US law.
There are three ways someone can be a US citizen. He can be born in the US (regardless of who his parents are). He can be born outside the US to at least one US citizen parent, as long as certain criteria are met (those criteria are set by federal law and have been changed over time). Or he can immigrate here and then successfully apply for citizenship, a process called naturalization.
Everyone agrees that the first category of people are natural-born citizens. Everyone agrees that the third category of people are not natural-born citizens (regardless of how unfair it might be that immigrants can't be president). But Ted Cruz is in the middle category, and this is where the meaning of "natural born" starts to get fuzzy.
(Excerpt) Read more at vox.com ...
Agree.
It’s funny - All fifty states have certified Cruz for their ballots.
“You’re just chapped because because it’s affecting your preferred candidate.”
Actually. I’m just confused because I thought Carson was different.
The current Kenyan has an American birth certificate fake though it is and he will be excused if this ever goes to court.
“But the chooming Kenyan Mulatto gets a pass. How ironic...”
There are no magic Caucasian Canadians.
Nope. I’ve never been to the state of Hawai’i explicitly recognizes that Hawai’i is a state.
Think about it.
You have all the data you need to figure it out.
(Don’t feel too bad if you can’t, I’ve stumped native Hawai’ians with it)
So a single judge will give us the answer. Then the Supreme Court refuses to take the case or a 4-4 decision. Wouldn’t that be something? It could be Scalia’s death that takes Cruz out of the running.
I was just making points inartfully.
if they rule in a way thatmakes the present occupier ineligible, then it’ll be like your handle- all exectuive orders, judicial appointments, etc will be nul and void. Do-overs on Kagan and Sotomayor, Obamacare, the works!
Nope.
See post #145.
Think about it...
Single moms still have a sperm donor. . usually.
Is the judge who is looking at the case a liberal? She may just rule against Cruz. Then what?
Former governor, went into private sector for a bit. good family, Ohio seems to like him. to be honest i didnt really know much about Kasich other than watching him on Fox and this election. He seems sorta soft, no military experience, but i think he has the acumen for high office and wont embarass us. Im not much for student council types on steroids, but he did make it to the top in his state becoming governor. Boring dude, but theres not much you can do about that like talking louder and jerking around in town meetings. People are sick of electing people to Congress and they do nothing or whine they cant do nothing.
[Actually. I’m just confused because I thought Carson was different.]
If by ‘different’, you mean he’s a pussy? If you, you were very wrong. He might be calm demeanored, but he didn’t become who he is in medicine by being weak.
lol
The Founders read Vattel in the French original form and utilized his ideas and concepts extensively. They chose his interpretations over English common law in many instances.
The Founders quoted Vattel's treatise to each other and went back and rewrote the section on qualifications for the Presidency specifically to address the issue of Natural born citizen as defined by Vattel. The Founders and the early Congress specifically revised the Immigration act of 1790 in 1795 to codify that American law differed English common law and to protect from an American President who could be claimed as an English subject.
Ruled?
A "sense of the senate" is not a law, and the senate is not congress.
Very different than Cruz who had to negate his Canadian Citizenship.
I agree that this is something that should be resolved, definitively by the Supreme Court, early in the primary season, rather than as a "gotcha!" move by the Dems in October.
And you KNOW they would do it, if there was any chance of messing up a Republican.
From your keyboard to God’s eyes!
“If by ‘different’, you mean he’s a pussy?”
No. But it’s funny he reacted one way when Trump compared him to a child molester and tanked his campaign. But completely different when it comes to Cruz. So it just confuses me.
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.