Trouble For Ted Cruz: Here's Why He Doesn't Meet The Natural Born Citizen Requirement

[M.D. Rawlings]

To be a "natural born citizen" the person MUST be born in the US mainland of two US citizen parents. (plural)

If what you say is true, then you shouldn't have any problem whatsoever quoting the passage asserting that very thing for all time in the Constitution, in the statutory record or in case law.

Where is this assertion found in the law? Why haven't you produced it?

Let's have it!

*crickets chirping*

Are you claiming that it wouldn't have to be in the law?

Is it written in the stars?

Is it riding on the winds?

Is it the writing on your wall?

Are you claiming your assertion in the above to be the official citation?

Is it a mystery?

Is it a riddle?

Is it a secret?

Just how stupid and morally corrupt are you?

 

[Nutz]

To be a "natural born citizen" the person MUST be born in the US mainland of two US citizen parents. (plural)

If what you say is true, then you shouldn't have any problem whatsoever quoting the passage asserting that very thing for all time in the Constitution, in the statutory record or in case law.

Where is this assertion found in the law? Why haven't you produced it?

Let's have it!

*crickets chirping*

Are you claiming that it wouldn't have to be in the law?

Is it written in the stars?

Is it riding on the winds?

Is it the writing on your wall?

Are you claiming your assertion in the above to be the official citation?

Is it a mystery?

Is it a riddle?

Is it a secret?

Just how stupid and morally corrupt are you?

LOL...he will come up with an article from a hate site to prove his assertion!

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Username McGarrett uses racist images to convey who and what it is.

Then it posts some bullshit which, frankly, is not only self-contradictory but also generally wrong, which is ok since McGarrett doesn't have the capacity to comprehend any part of it in any event.

Then people "engage" it and seem mystified to find out that it is just a blithering simpleton.

 

[JohnA]

All this flap when you all know that, elected or not, Hillary is going to be your next president. Unless Barry decides he wants to stay on so the chillins can grow up in luxury.

nonboma has served his time( 2 terms ) under the constitution sonnerr he is gone the better

 

[Nutz]

Username McGarrett uses racist images to convey who and what it is.

Then it posts some bullshit which, frankly, is not only self-contradictory but also generally wrong, which is ok since McGarrett doesn't have the capacity to comprehend any part of it in any event.

Then people "engage" it and seem mystified to find out that it is just a blithering simpleton.

Exactly, him and the other members of the Pussy Brigade spend countless hours spewing their nonsense on this forum. They are doing a good job of outing those who are ashamed to admit they are racist, but the negative consequence is that this forum has become nothing more than a stormfront style website in disguise.

 

[NewEnglander]

The provision wherein a person born outside the US of US parents was natural born in the naturalization Act of 1790 was repealed in 1795. That provision may well have been unconstitutional, c.f., the unpublished brief by Honorable Pinckney McElwee which was read by Rep. John Dowdy on the House floor June 14, 1967. Indeed it was james madison who was primarily responsible for removing the erroneous natural born citizen clause from the Act. Indeed, the USSC in US v. Ark noted that between 1802 and 1855 persons born beyond the limits of the US were aliens, nether natural born nor naturalized. US v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649,674, 18 S.Ct. 456,466 (1898) (“It thus clearly appears that, during the half century intervening between 1802 and 1855, there was no legislation whatever for the citizenship of children born abroad, during that period, of American parents who had not become citizens of the United States before the act of 1802.&#8221

 

[Just_Me]

Nay I say NewEnglander! Although ye be in the correct area ye are incorect!
The definition was removed but not changed.

The meaning of of the term Natural Born Citizen as described by the founding fathers still stands. No amendment has been ratified to describe or update a new meaning therfore the definition has not changed.

The intent of the law still stands.

The Term Natural Born Citizen is still a requirement. One is not allowed by law to redefine its meaning simply because the definition was removed in error.(or even intentionally)
You may NOT read into it any way you please. When looking for the founding fathers defination you only need to know their defination. Clearly it can be found in the Public acts of the first congress 2nd session chapter III March 26, 1790.

The definition is legal untill the Constitution is ammended and a new defination is installed. If that ever happens.

 

[Silhouette]

The intent of the law still stands.

The Term Natural Born Citizen is still a requirement. One is not allowed by law to redefine its meaning simply because the definition was removed in error.(or even intentionally)
You may NOT read into it any way you please.
.

And that is what the USSC will weigh the case on this September or October (if Cruz gets the nod). The intent is to minimize loyalties to foreign countries in the one Office that has the most unilateral power granted to any one man. If someone gets out of line in Congress, there are hundreds to check his momentum. Not so with POTUS. And so, "natural born" is natural born. No exceptions.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Nay I say NewEnglander! Although ye be in the correct area ye are incorect!
The definition was removed but not changed.

The meaning of of the term Natural Born Citizen as described by the founding fathers still stands. No amendment has been ratified to describe or update a new meaning therfore the definition has not changed.

The intent of the law still stands.

The Term Natural Born Citizen is still a requirement. One is not allowed by law to redefine its meaning simply because the definition was removed in error.(or even intentionally)
You may NOT read into it any way you please. When looking for the founding fathers defination you only need to know their defination. Clearly it can be found in the Public acts of the first congress 2nd session chapter III March 26, 1790.

The definition is legal untill the Constitution is ammended and a new defination is installed. If that ever happens.

False. The 1790 Act was repealed with the term 'natural born Citizen' replaced with just 'Citizen' in the 1795 Naturalization Act.

 

[easyt65]

Birther Alert, Birther Alert...the liberals who attacked orhers for being birthers are suddenly birthers. This is too funny.

 

[Skylar]

Here is why Ted doesn't meet the qualifications of Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to be eligible for President. Cruz did not inherit citizenship from his mother, he is a U.S. citizen because at birth he fulfilled the requirements established by Congress.

Prior to May 24, 1934 the uniform Rule of Naturalization did not allow a person to acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if they were born outside the U.S. to a citizen mother and a non citizen father; during that time, persons born outside of the U.S. could only acquire citizenship at birth if their father was a citizen of the U.S. but not to a father who had never resided in the United States.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada after the 1934 date to a U.S. citizen mother and a non U.S. citizen father, he acquired citizenship at birth under the uniform Rule of Naturalization that was in effect at the time of his birth.

Ted Cruz cannot be a “natural born Citizen” if a person born prior to May 24, 1934 with the same birth circumstances was not even a “citizen of the United States”.

The Constitution gives Congress the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, it does not give Congress the Power over who is a "natural born Citizen. A "natural born Citizen" today is the same as who a "natural born Citizen" was when the term was inserted into the Constitution, it can only be changed by Constitutional Amendment.

Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen"; if he were, then persons born prior to the 1934 date would also of been. Because, Congress does not have Power over who is a "natural born Citizen" they only have the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization and the Rule they established prior to the 1934 date only allowed persons born abroad to a U.S. citizen father to acquire citizenship at birth as long as their father had been a resident of the U.S.

Therefore Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen".

Cruz was born under the 1952 Naturalization Act which superseded the 1934 act. Making your claims irrelevant.

 

[Just_Me]

Irrelevant!

The requirements for president are still in the constitution. Listed in the requirements are Natural Born Status. And the forfathers definition still stands.

 

[easyt65]

Birther...

 

[easyt65]

Since when do liberals give a flying crap about the Constitution / Rule of Law?

 

[JimH52]

Birther Alert, Birther Alert...the liberals who attacked orhers for being birthers are suddenly birthers. This is too funny.

I could care a little bit about Cruz. He and Trump are the biggest jokes to ever seek the White House.

 

[Syriusly]

Birther Alert, Birther Alert...the liberals who attacked orhers for being birthers are suddenly birthers. This is too funny.

So you are calling Trump a Liberal?

Or just a Birther?

 

[Syriusly]

Since when do liberals give a flying crap about the Constitution / Rule of Law?

Since when do Conservatives care about anything but corporate profits?

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Here is why Ted doesn't meet the qualifications of Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to be eligible for President. Cruz did not inherit citizenship from his mother, he is a U.S. citizen because at birth he fulfilled the requirements established by Congress.

Prior to May 24, 1934 the uniform Rule of Naturalization did not allow a person to acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if they were born outside the U.S. to a citizen mother and a non citizen father; during that time, persons born outside of the U.S. could only acquire citizenship at birth if their father was a citizen of the U.S. but not to a father who had never resided in the United States.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada after the 1934 date to a U.S. citizen mother and a non U.S. citizen father, he acquired citizenship at birth under the uniform Rule of Naturalization that was in effect at the time of his birth.

Ted Cruz cannot be a “natural born Citizen” if a person born prior to May 24, 1934 with the same birth circumstances was not even a “citizen of the United States”.

The Constitution gives Congress the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, it does not give Congress the Power over who is a "natural born Citizen. A "natural born Citizen" today is the same as who a "natural born Citizen" was when the term was inserted into the Constitution, it can only be changed by Constitutional Amendment.

Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen"; if he were, then persons born prior to the 1934 date would also of been. Because, Congress does not have Power over who is a "natural born Citizen" they only have the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization and the Rule they established prior to the 1934 date only allowed persons born abroad to a U.S. citizen father to acquire citizenship at birth as long as their father had been a resident of the U.S.

Therefore Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen".

Cruz was born under the 1952 Naturalization Act which superseded the 1934 act. Making your claims irrelevant.

Yes, it made Cruz a naturalized citizen at birth.

 

[Skylar]

Here is why Ted doesn't meet the qualifications of Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to be eligible for President. Cruz did not inherit citizenship from his mother, he is a U.S. citizen because at birth he fulfilled the requirements established by Congress.

Prior to May 24, 1934 the uniform Rule of Naturalization did not allow a person to acquire U.S. citizenship at birth if they were born outside the U.S. to a citizen mother and a non citizen father; during that time, persons born outside of the U.S. could only acquire citizenship at birth if their father was a citizen of the U.S. but not to a father who had never resided in the United States.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada after the 1934 date to a U.S. citizen mother and a non U.S. citizen father, he acquired citizenship at birth under the uniform Rule of Naturalization that was in effect at the time of his birth.

Ted Cruz cannot be a “natural born Citizen” if a person born prior to May 24, 1934 with the same birth circumstances was not even a “citizen of the United States”.

The Constitution gives Congress the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, it does not give Congress the Power over who is a "natural born Citizen. A "natural born Citizen" today is the same as who a "natural born Citizen" was when the term was inserted into the Constitution, it can only be changed by Constitutional Amendment.

Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen"; if he were, then persons born prior to the 1934 date would also of been. Because, Congress does not have Power over who is a "natural born Citizen" they only have the Power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization and the Rule they established prior to the 1934 date only allowed persons born abroad to a U.S. citizen father to acquire citizenship at birth as long as their father had been a resident of the U.S.

Therefore Ted Cruz is not a "natural born Citizen".

Cruz was born under the 1952 Naturalization Act which superseded the 1934 act. Making your claims irrelevant.

Yes, it made Cruz a naturalized citizen at birth.

It supersedes the 1934 law.....which you knew. But really hoped we didn't.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

werent the Clintons from Mars? just look at their cousin with that bald head and glasses,,,,james carville?