McCain Had Senate Resolution Passed To Confirm Him A Natural Born Citizen. Should Ted Cruz Get One?

Steve_McGarrett

Gold Member
Jul 11, 2013
19,272
4,368
280
If you remember, there was serious issues raised by Constitutional scholars and lawmakers if McCain was a natural born citizen and eligible for Article 2. So several Senate members got together and passed a 'non-binding' Senate Resolution 511 that confirmed him a natural born Citizen.

In it and the most crucial point the resolution confirms is that he was born to both American citizen parents who were 'serving our country' outside it's borders on a military base. Also they cite the first Congress statute (Naturalization Act of 1790 which at the time the fathers citizenship was passed to the child if born out to sea abroad). It also says several presidential candidates were born outside the United States. Yes that was true but one was born in a territory of the United States. Namely Barry Goldwater was born in the U.S. 'Arizona Territory' to two U.S. citizen parents. Now when it comes to George Romney, he was born in Mexico but his parents were both U.S. citizens born in the U.S. 'Territory of Utah'.

Now when it comes to Ted Cruz, he was not born in a U.S. territory. He was born in a foreign sovereignty to a foreign national father. Also, most definitely, his U.S. citizen mom was not 'serving our country' abroad. Ted Cruz clearly doesn't meet the criteria they made for McCain in Resolution 511. Never the less, does Cruz deserve a special resolution for his eligibility problem? The answer is no!

_text_image


senate-resolution-5111.png
 
Last edited:
Rafael Fidel Eduardo Cruz can only be eligible to run for President with an amendment to the constitution. And good luck getting that passed a Presidential veto before November 2016! :rofl:
No he will not. His mother was a citizen, correct?

That makes him a natural born citizen - period. End of story.
 
Anyone want to comment on this serious constitutional matter?
He should not get one as McCain should have never done this as well. It was all birther idiocy - born to an American parent means that you are an American.

He should renounce his citizenship if he announces candidacy. That can pose an issue but a natural American he is.
 
Anyone want to comment on this serious constitutional matter?
He should not get one as McCain should have never done this as well. It was all birther idiocy - born to an American parent means that you are an American.

He should renounce his citizenship if he announces candidacy. That can pose an issue but a natural American he is.
False. Cruz is a statutory citizen via the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952. He is not a Article 2 natural born Citizen.
 
Anyone want to comment on this serious constitutional matter?
He should not get one as McCain should have never done this as well. It was all birther idiocy - born to an American parent means that you are an American.

He should renounce his citizenship if he announces candidacy. That can pose an issue but a natural American he is.
False. Cruz is a statutory citizen via the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952. He is not a Article 2 natural born Citizen.

Cruz never went through the naturalization process.

This is the final word on eligibility.

On the Meaning of Natural Born Citizen - On the Meaning of Natural Born Citizen
Like it or not. No matter what your personal opinion is, this is the law.
 
I have never seen anything to suggest that McCain initiated the Senate Resolution- which by the way was legally meaningless.

What it did show though was that the Senate considered McCain to be a Natural Born Citizen- which was a concern for some people.

But the answer is- there is no need for the Senate to pass such a resolution for Cruz, but it would be fine it the Senate did.
 
If you remember, there was serious issues raised by Constitutional scholars and lawmakers if McCain was a natural born citizen and eligible for Article 2. So several Senate members got together and passed a 'non-binding' Senate Resolution 511 that confirmed him a natural born Citizen.

In it and the most crucial point the resolution confirms is that he was born to both American citizen parents who were 'serving our country' outside it's borders on a military base. Also they cite the first Congress statute (Naturalization Act of 1790 which at the time the fathers citizenship was passed to the child if born out to sea abroad). It also says several presidential candidates were born outside the United States. Yes that was true but one was born in a territory of the United States. Namely Barry Goldwater was born in the U.S. 'Arizona Territory' to two U.S. citizen parents. Now when it comes to George Romney, he was born in Mexico but his parents were both U.S. citizens born in the U.S. 'Territory of Utah'.

Now when it comes to Ted Cruz, he was not born in a U.S. territory. He was born in a foreign sovereignty to a foreign national father. Also, most definitely, his U.S. citizen mom was not 'serving our country' abroad. Ted Cruz clearly doesn't meet the criteria they made for McCain in Resolution 511. Never the less, does Cruz deserve a special resolution for his eligibility problem? The answer is no!

_text_image


senate-resolution-5111.png


The US is the States, territories and holdings. So anyone born in a US territory is born in the US.
 
Anyone want to comment on this serious constitutional matter?
He should not get one as McCain should have never done this as well. It was all birther idiocy - born to an American parent means that you are an American.

He should renounce his citizenship if he announces candidacy. That can pose an issue but a natural American he is.
False. Cruz is a statutory citizen via the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952. He is not a Article 2 natural born Citizen.

Cruz never went through the naturalization process.

This is the final word on eligibility.

No, that's you applying pressure to a keyboard and typing out two sentences. And you typing doesn't make law.

Title 8, Section 1401 lays out the requirements for Cruz to achieve citizenship at birth. And a citizen at birth isn't a naturalized citizen.

Except in Puerto Rico, oddly. And I don't know that this bizarre designation established by congress uniquely for Puerto Rico would hold up constitutionally.

On the Meaning of Natural Born Citizen - On the Meaning of Natural Born Citizen
Like it or not. No matter what your personal opinion is, this is the law.

And you do realize that your own source, what you refer to as 'the law' found that Cruz was a natural born citizen.

"Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a “natural born Citizen” within the meaning of the Constitution."

On the Meaning of Natural Born Citizen - On the Meaning of Natural Born Citizen

Right?
 
Except in Puerto Rico, oddly. And I don't know that this bizarre designation established by congress uniquely for Puerto Rico would hold up constitutionally.
Why?

The constitution is, for the most part, silent on the natural born citizen concept. Mostly because the idea did not fully exist when it was written. What in the constitution would make it illegal to bar someone born in Puerto Rico not a natural citizen - we already do not allow them protections in the constitution such as representation. They may be a territory but they operate more like their own nations.
 
Except in Puerto Rico, oddly. And I don't know that this bizarre designation established by congress uniquely for Puerto Rico would hold up constitutionally.
Why?

Congress has created a law that makes this quite explicit. They've created the lone example of 'naturalized at birth' for those born on Puerto Rico and Puerto Rico alone. I don't know why Congress did it, though I suspect a healthy dollop of period appropriate racism played a part. But this status is unique in US law.

As the founders demonstrated with the Naturalization Act of 1790, 'natural born' status is most definitely within the statutory control of congress.

The constitution is, for the most part, silent on the natural born citizen concept. Mostly because the idea did not fully exist when it was written.

I disagree. The concept of 'natural born subject' was well establish in British Common Law. The functional difference between a 'subject' and a 'citizen' is trivial in terms of the meaning of 'natural born'. And related primarily to the difference between a government and a kingdom. With most of British common law rooted in the latter. And most of US law rooted in the former.
 

Forum List

Back
Top