U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles
Title: Lawyers say Canadian-born Cruz eligible to run for president
Source:
FoxNews
URL Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201 ... eligible-to-run-for-president/
Published: Mar 14, 2015
Author: Dan Gallo
Post Date: 2015-03-14 09:30:11 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 6414
Comments: 38
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, speaks at the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Legislative Conference and Presidential Forum in Washington. While questions about Canadian-born Sen. Ted Cruz’s eligibility to be president haven’t drawn much attention, two former Justice Department lawyers have weighed in with a bipartisan verdict: Cruz, they say, is eligible to run for the White House.
Neal Katyal, acting solicitor general in the Obama administration, and Paul Clemente, solicitor general in President George W. Bush’s administration, got out in front of the issue in a Harvard Law Review article.
“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,” they wrote.
Anti-Cruz “birthers” had questioned the Texas Republican senator’s eligibility to be president, challenging his citizenship status because he was born in Canada. Two years ago, Cruz released his birth certificate showing his mother was a U.S. citizen born in Delaware, presumably satisfying the requirements for presidential eligibility as a “natural born citizen.”
The law review article, “On the Meaning of ‘Natural Born Citizen”, asserts that the interpretation of the term was settled in Cruz’s favor as early as the 1700’s. The lawyers wrote that the Supreme Court has long used British common law and enactments of the First Congress for guidance on defining a “natural born citizen.”
“Both confirm that the original meaning of the phrase ‘natural born Citizen’ includes persons born abroad who are citizens from birth based on the citizenship of a parent,” they wrote. They concluded someone like Cruz had “no need to go through naturalization proceedings,” making him eligible. Cruz is still weighing a presidential run.
Last month, Cruz addressed the citizenship issue during a question-and-answer session with moderator Sean Hannity, of Fox News, at the Conservative Political Action Conference. “I was born in Calgary. My mother was an American citizen by birth,” Cruz said. “Under federal law, that made me an American citizen by birth. The Constitution requires that you be a natural-born citizen.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 15.
#1. To: cranky (#0)
So even if Obama was born in Kenya he meets the requirement. How about that? Boy, how opinion changes when it's "our" guy, huh?
Boy, how opinion changes when it's "our" guy, huh? There is a difference. Cruz's father had legal status to be in the U.S. Obama's father did not.
Legal status? WTF does that have to do with U.S. citizenship? When Ted Cruz was born in Canada, his father had Canadian citizenship. Seems to me that Canada could just as easily say that since Ted Cruz was born on Canadian soil to a Canadian father, he's a natural born Canadian citizen. No?
Seems to me that Canada could just as easily say that since Ted Cruz was born on Canadian soil to a Canadian father, he's a natural born Canadian citizen. No? Do you think that wet wetbacks are more of a citizen then a U.S soldier who would happen to have his child born in say Germany? Here is what it has to do with. I read an article a few years ago that made that point better then I did. Cruz 2016 if you want your country back.
You're confusing "citizen" with "natural born citizen". According to the 14th amendment, a child born on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. In my opinion, it's time to modify that amendment by adding the phrase "... born to a least one citizen parent".
IMHO,it's time to change it to state that NO child born of either parent that was an illegal alien when the child was conceived or born has a right to US citizenship,either now or in the future. It is supposed to be illegal to profit from a crime.
Cruz, Rubio, Jindal, and Santorum are all ineligible. The following, which is not my work, is an analysis of that statement. Note the reference to "parents", not "parent". John Bingham, "father of the 14th Amendment", the abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln's assassins, reaffirmed the definition known to the framers, not once, but twice during Congressional discussions of Citizenship pertaining to the upcoming 14th Amendment and a 3rd time nearly 4 years after the 14th was adopted. The House of Representatives definition for "natural born Citizen" was read into the Congressional Record during the Civil War, without contest! "All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians." (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)). The House of Representatives definition for "natural born Citizen" was read into the Congressional Record after the Civil War, without contest! “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))" No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested. However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the sovereign territory of the U.S.) was never challenged on the floor of the House. Without a challenge on the definition, it appears they ALL where in agreement. Then, during a debate (see pg. 2791) on April 25, 1872 regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen (generally. they were not trying to decide if he was a NBC). Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor: “As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.” (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872. And, since they knew he was, without a doubt, a natural born Citizen...he was, of course, considered a citizen of the U.S.) The take away from this is that, while the debates and discussions went on for years in the people's house regarding "citizenship" and the 14th Amendment, not a single Congressman disagreed with the primary architect's multiple statements on who is a natural born Citizen per the Constitution. The United States House was in complete agreement at the time. NBC = born in sovereign U.S. territory, to 2 citizen parentS who owe allegiance to no other country.
And that is the definition of 'natural born' and the reason one needs to be natural born to be POTUS, imho. Anybody else remember the debate about whether a Catholic (JFK) owed allegiance to another sovereignty (the Vatican) and so should be disqualified from running for President?
#18. To: cranky (#15)
Sure. And I agree. But that says nothing about persons born within the Republic of one parent owing allegiance to no other sovereignty. Or no parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty. Had he said, "all other persons born within the Republic, only of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens,then you'd be right. If an individual is worth $10 million, he's a millionaire. Does that mean a person with $2 million is not?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest"Both confirm that the original meaning of the phrase ‘natural born Citizen’ includes persons born abroad who are citizens from birth based on the citizenship of a parent”
#2. To: misterwhite (#1)
So even if Obama was born in Kenya he meets the requirement. How about that?
#3. To: A K A Stone (#2)
There is a difference.
Cruz's father had legal status to be in the U.S.Obama's father did not.
#4. To: misterwhite (#3)
Legal status? WTF does that have to do with U.S. citizenship? When Ted Cruz was born in Canada, his father had Canadian citizenship.
#5. To: A K A Stone (#4)
"Do you think that wet wetbacks are more of a citizen then a U.S soldier who would happen to have his child born in say Germany?"
#10. To: misterwhite (#5)
In my opinion, it's time to modify that amendment by adding the phrase "... born to a least one citizen parent".
#11. To: (#10)
#15. To: No Apologies (#11)
all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens
Replies to Comment # 15. "all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens"
End Trace Mode for Comment # 15.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]