Posted on 02/20/2016 8:52:39 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Now Donald Trump is questioning Marco Rubio' eligibility for the presidency.
In a tweet Saturday, Trump shared a video of what appears to be an attorney making a bizarre case that not only Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada, but Rubio, whose parents immigranted from Cuba, is not eligible to become president.
In the tweet to his 6.3 million followers, Trump quoted a message sent to him by another Twitter user, who at the time appeared to have five followers: "@realDonaldTrump Mr. Trump...BOTH Cruz AND Rubio are ineligible to be POTUS! It's a SLAM DUNK CASE!! Check it!"
The tweet links to a video on the website of the Powdered Whig Society, a group that says it is dedicated "to the restoration and strict obedience to the United States Constitution."
The 12-minute video shows an unidentified woman who is purported to be a litigation attorney describe what it means to be a natural born citizen. She argues that both Rubio and Cruz are citizens, but not "natural born citizens" according to the Constitution, which says only natural born citizens may become president.
Rubio was born in Miami. That makes him a natural born U.S. citizen under the Constitution. But the unnamed woman in the video Trump posted says he is not a "naturalized citizen," because his citizenship is defined under Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. If not for this "man-made law," she says Rubio would have been born a "resident alien," the same status of his parents, both of whom were Cuban nationals.
The supposed attorney later goes on to call Congress using laws to change the original text of the Constitution as "ridiculous."
"In order to understand the genuine meaning of a text, we must use the definition the framer's use, otherwise texts become like Play-Doh. They mean whatever you want them to mean to get the outcome you want," she says.
Cruz, who was born in Canada to father who was a Cuban national and an American mother. Some legal scholars says that leaves his eligibility to run for president in question. But the supposed attorney makes a far more questionable case. She argues that when the Constitution was written, a woman's legal identity was subsumed into her husband's. That would also disqualify Cruz, she says, because it is necessary that he be born of a father who is a citizen.
When the Constitution was written in the 1780s, the purported attorney says all the framers knew what a natural born citizen was, using a definition provided in Swiss philosopher and legal expert Emerich de Vattel's book on political philosophy The Law of Nations. In it, she says, a child's status as a citizen is defined as being inherited from the father, and that it does not matter where the child is born.
Like his eye color, citizenship is "inherited by his parents, it's in his blood," she says. "Not an act of Congress."
Scroll down for video
Yeah cuz’ Trump re-tweeted someone else’s tweet he had a “hissy fit”.
You folks are nonsensical in the extreme these days. As a Trump supporter I want to thank you for all you do to drive folks away from Cruz & to Trump. Keep up the good work.
Go Trump!
Ramsay, John Bingham and Jacob Howard agree with you.
http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html
Two things are strange about Trump on Twitter.
The first is he does not retweet. He copies and pastes and tweets. This takes more time and effort, but has the advantage of not disappearing if the original tweet is deleted. It also hurts the original tweeter as it does not promote their account in the Twitterverse.
The second thing is he never uses Hillary Clinton’s Twitter handle when he tweets negatively about her. So his comments never appear in her feed. This is not the case when he criticizes a conservative on Twitter.
There is a method to his madness, but I have not yet figured it out.
All of his wives were citizen when children were born.Not according to Trump's biography on Wikipedia:
Trump married model Ivana ZelnÃÄková on April 7, 1977, at the Marble Collegiate Church in New York.[176] They have three children: sons Donald, Jr. (born December 31, 1977) and Eric (born January 6, 1984), and daughter Ivanka (born October 30, 1981). Ivana became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1988.So, Trump's children with Ivana clearly are not NBC. His child with Melania may or may not be, depending on exactly when she became a citizen (I couldn't find an exact date, but if it was after March, then Barron wouldn't be an NBC either)....
Maples gave birth to their daughter Tiffany on October 13, 1993. They married two months later on December 20, 1993.[
...
In 2006, Melania became a naturalized U.S. citizen.[190] In March 2006, she gave birth to their son named Barron William Trump
The only one of Trump's (known) children who is clearly a NBC is the illegitimate one (Tiffany).
Yes, it would elevate Cruz to his level, and there is no reason for Trump to do that.
Did you forget a sarc tag or are you that unfamiliar with the constitution that you would not post the entire provision?
Sorry, I keep forgetting that we are on the same side.
“How do you think abortion became legal?”
You won’t find a “right to privacy” or “penumbra” used to legitimize infanticide mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. The Supremes made it up.
Unfortunately for the foreign-born, the terms “natural born citizen” and “citizen” are used in Article 2, Section 1, clause 5.
It’s right there.
You will probably find the following to be at least pedantic or even overbearing, but at this point, I don’t care.
Those of us `birthers’ who fought Obama’s eligibility see the actions of those here who objected to Obama based upon his origins (even though he claims to be born in Hawaii, while Cruz admits foreign birth) who are now quibbling and puling over the plain wording of the Constitution, to be `special pleading’.
Special Pleading is a fallacy in which a person applies standards, principles, rules, etc. to others while taking himself (or those he has a special interest in) to be exempt, without providing adequate justification for the exemption.
This sort of “reasoning” has the following form:
Person A accepts standard(s) S and applies them to others in circumstance(s) C.
Person A is in circumstance(s) C.
Therefore A is exempt from S.
After thousands of `discussions’ here on FR on the subject it has reached the point where many of us don’t see those who refuse to read Article 2, section 1, clause 5 and give it a literal reading—particularly when considering that their hero is a Constitutional “originalist”—as simply wrong or mistaken, but unreasonable.
The ignorant, and even the stupid can be taught, but unreasonable people are hopeless.
This needless controversy generated by Cruz and possibly Rubio (the “foam party” muchacho) as well will be resolved soon by the electorate. Then maybe the GOP-e serial posters and others who will not see will fade back into the woodwork.
OK - you guys win. Cruz and Rubio are can’t run - so I’ll have to vote for Bush.
One last question: was Barry Goldwater a “natural born citizen”? He was born in AZ, before it was a state. I don’t know where his parents were born.
You mean the 8 years here if Trump get's elected?
Yeah, it's gonna be a hoot.
The fact that Trump the Birther is questioning Rubio’s eligibility is not so surprising as the fact that he’s waited this long to do so.
Then shut up and file it, Trump. No more empty threats.
> Rubio was born in Miami. That makes him a natural born U.S. citizen under the Constitution.
Opinion expressed as if it were fact.
The 1790 act was promptly overturned by the 1795 act because it was stated poorly and allowed for the confusion you have illustrated.But the key point is that Congress gets to define the term.
The "birthers" arguments are all ultimately based on the nonsensical position that some Swiss writer takes priority of the Congress.
The Framers could have been explicit about what they meant by NBC, but they left it open to interpretation. The only group with standing to make that interpretation is the Congress.
Ivana Trump, naturalized in 1988.
However, all the state laws at the time of the adoption of the Constitution stated that the wife was the nationality of her husband because upon marriage, they become “ONE” in the eyes of the law. A female alien marrying a US citizen was automatically a US citizen & likewise, a female US citizen becomes an alien upon her marriage to an alien.
Library of Congress, Immigration and Naturalization
The 1st major exception to this 1790 Act was that "derivative" citizenship was granted to wives and minor children of naturalized men. From 1790 to 1922, wives of naturalized men automatically became citizens. This also meant that an alien woman who married a U.S. citizen automatically became a citizen. (Conversely, an American woman who married an alien lost her U.S. citizenship, even if she never left the United States.) From 1790 to 1940, children under the age of 21 automatically became naturalized citizens upon the naturalization of their father.
And so what changed? Congress, under the authority given to them in A1,S8, "to make "UNIFORM FULES OF NATURALIZATION"", deemed they had the power to naturalize children born abroad to American women who had married aliens, and then also at a later date, they deemed, through fiat regulations regarding citizenship, they had the authority to deem as citizens, children born in the US to alien parents without ever having passed a stature saying so.
I’m very sorry for your loss of eyesight, blindness is a terrible thing.
His parent were both citizens. He was born in US territory. IIRC the congress ruled he was eligible. As they ruled MC Cain.
Mc Cornell told Cruz he would not bring it to the floor. Google it.
There was also an interview by a Texan Gopee member before the senate election. Where Ted himself said that both parents had to be citizens and candidate had to be born on us soil.
The article said the interviewer is keeping all things quiet to be used in court against TC if its ever taken to court.
His law professor said he followed the constitutionist which further would promote his initial statement on subject.
Regardless he did not take the progressive line until he decided to run for president. The fact that he and DT talked about it previously indicates he is aware there was an issue.
Unless like the expert in the video many would after 0 took office assume anything goes.
If Cruz is not eligible then when the British Archive BC of BO is produced hBCwill be shown as a fraud. I HAVE considered that this is all a set up kabuki to set up 0. Is Cruz a big enough patriot to allow himself to be used? You’ll have to answer that
NBC = Born on US soil of TWO US citizens.
That eliminates Obama, Cruz and Rubio.
There are quite a number of soldiers who dodged bullets who married non-citizens who would be ready to kick your ass for that statement.Lighten up, Francis.
I'm not the one making the silly "birther" arguments. That would be the Trumpsters. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of their arguments.
Let's not forget that Trump wasn't one of those who "dodged bullets" for his country. He was a draft dodger.
He also recently stated that risking getting STDs was "his" Vietnam [LINK].
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.