Posted on 02/22/2016 8:31:51 AM PST by elhombrelibre
And so it begins (again)...
When Ben Carson got a little to close to him in the polls, Donald Trump compared him to a child molester, and when Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) began to get close to him before the Iowa caucuses, Trump, the GOP leader in the presidential race, started suggesting that Cruz was not a natural born citizen. And, now that Marco Rubio seems to have picked up some momentum with a second place finish in South Carolina, Donald Trump has started to direct his ad hominem venom at the Florida senator.
It started with a tweet the morning of the S.C. primary:
(Excerpt) Read more at mrctv.org ...
“Were Rubio’s parents citizens when he was born?”
Marco Rubio Once Benefitted From Birthright Citizenship ...
https://www.nationaljournal.com/twentysixteen/.../marco...
National Journal
Aug 18, 2015 - Neither of Rubio’s parents was a citizen at the time of his birth in 1971 in Miami.
“Natural born citizen is an exclusionary term, meaning if one can be anything else, one cannot be a natural born citizen.”
Not true. You can be a natural born US citizen and potentially possess citizenship in another country.
The only thing fading more quickly than winter is Cruz.
Since you have nothing positive to post to support your candidate, you post things against others.
“If mine can’t win, I’ll stop his competition any way I can!”, even if you have to support Rubio...
How pathetic.
And I’ll bet those of you that switch to Rubio in here will understand the cyclical purges much more personally.
You would think that world-class lawyer Trump claims he has working on the suits would have told him by now. Yet he keeps threatening.
Yep... it’s time for Marco to stop repeating Trump’s talking points.
Cruz/Rubio 2016
- or -
Trump/Clinton 2016
A time for choosing indeed.
Well if the shoe fits and all that good stuff. LOL!
Let’s make the princes of Jordan eligible and Princess Grace of Monaco’s kids as well. And don’t forget the kids of the drug cartel lords. Oh yay. /s
Read some of the writings of the founders. You are wrong. They would not think British subjects are eligible.
“It takes that long to tell the attorney he claims to have looking into it to go file?”
You can’t control the outcome, publicity wise, of a lawsuit that has only been filed. Rubio would seek to portray it to the voters as mere politics, dirty politics, etc.
It is much better just to raise the issue through various means.
It should certainly be resolved before the next elections.
Many of us were taught in school and colleges before this came up that a president must have been born on American soil from citizen parents. That has been the historical take throughout American history.
There was a controversy over that very thing when Arthur
ran.
Republicans were absolutely derelict in not bringing the issue through the courts for a definition before Obama ran a second time. I was shocked when he first ran that there was no procedure to confirm that a candidate for US President was qualified to run.
If it isn't settled, you could run into crazy situations in the future where someone could be President of two countries at the same time, or someone brought up in an ISIS camp could be President, etc.
Trump is correct...settle it!
“Many of us were taught in school and colleges before this came up that a president must have been born on American soil from citizen parents. That has been the historical take throughout American history.”
That’s what was drummed into my head at school.
Well...he is an anchor baby.
Ha! I just posted the same thing. At least one of Ted's parents was an American citizen.
Article II Section 1 Clause 5:
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 clause “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,” gives a strong clue to what was meant by “natural born Citizen”.
The founders were (almost) all born in the colonies that became the United States.
So if being “born on the land” determined natural born citizenship they would not have need the “at the time” clause.
The founders were (almost) all born to parents who were Subjects of the British Crown.
So if being born to foreigners, in the territory that became the United States, were enough for natural born citizenship they would not have need the “at the time” clause.
By this simple analysis of the Constitution using it own language and simple logic, one can conclude that a person born in the United States from foreign parents can not be a “natural born citizen”.
So Marco Rubio is clearly ineligible to be President of the United States under the original intent of the Constitution.
To handle the case of Ted Cruz, one has to look at what determined the nationality of parents at the time of the founding. All original evidence says that the wife took on the nationality of her husband.
All the evidence we have it that Ted Cruz’s father was a Cuban citizen at the time of Ted’s birth, and that both mother and father were legal residents of Canada.
So applying the original intent of the Constitution, then Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen of the United States, and therefore not eligible to be President.
Of course, if one wants to abandon “Conservative Principles” in this one instance, and say that the original intent is obsolete, then one could say they are both eligible.
But, to by honest, you would have to admit you were a “Liberal” and not a “Conservative”
We’re Rubio’s parents naturalized citizens at the time of his birth?
They would have the same eligibility as Cruz, wouldn't they?
Nope.
It's a legitimate legal question which can't be clearly answered from existing law.
The British law to which proponents of citizenship look to is statutory, not common law, and there was no like statute in the US when the Constitution was adopted. Based on the common law that pre-dated the statute, it's an open question. Those who dismiss the matter as settled (in either direction) are being intellectually dishonest.
Born here of citizen parents
Natural born citizen
One is naturally a US citizen when there is no other possibility.
If one can be anything else, one cannot be a natural born citizen.
It has a clear meaning, but both parties want to run ineligible candidates, so they are confusing people as to what that meaning is.
Unfortunately for them, there are lots of us still alive who know what it means.
No
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.