The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: txradioguy on January 08, 2016, 07:45:14 AM
-
By Ilya Shapiro
This article appeared on Daily Caller on August 26, 2013.
As we head into a potential government shutdown over the funding of Obamacare, the iconoclastic junior senator from Texas — love him or hate him — continues to stride across the national stage. With his presidential aspirations as big as everything in his home state, by now many know what has never been a secret: Ted Cruz was born in Canada.
(Full disclosure: I’m Canadian myself, with a green card. Also, Cruz has been a friend since his days representing Texas before the Supreme Court.)
But does that mean that Cruz’s presidential ambitions are gummed up with maple syrup or stuck in snowdrifts altogether different from those plaguing the Iowa caucuses? Are the birthers now hoist on their own petards, having been unable to find any proof that President Obama was born outside the United States but forcing their comrade-in-boots to disqualify himself by releasing his Alberta birth certificate?
No, actually, and it’s not even that complicated; you just have to look up the right law. It boils down to whether Cruz is a “natural born citizen†of the United States, the only class of people constitutionally eligible for the presidency. (The Founding Fathers didn’t want their newly independent nation to be taken over by foreigners on the sly.)
What’s a “natural born citizen� The Constitution doesn’t say, but the Framers’ understanding, combined with statutes enacted by the First Congress, indicate that the phrase means both birth abroad to American parents — in a manner regulated by federal law — and birth within the nation’s territory regardless of parental citizenship. The Supreme Court has confirmed that definition on multiple occasions in various contexts.
There’s no ideological debate here: Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe and former solicitor general Ted Olson — who were on opposite sides in Bush v. Gore among other cases — co-authored a memorandum in March 2008 detailing the above legal explanation in the context of John McCain’s eligibility. Recall that McCain — lately one of Cruz’s chief antagonists — was born to U.S. citizen parents serving on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone.
In other words, anyone who is a citizen at birth — as opposed to someone who becomes a citizen later (“naturalizesâ€) or who isn’t a citizen at all — can be president.
So the one remaining question is whether Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth. That’s an easy one. The Nationality Act of 1940 outlines which children become “nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.†In addition to those who are born in the United States or born outside the country to parents who were both citizens — or, interestingly, found in the United States without parents and no proof of birth elsewhere — citizenship goes to babies born to one American parent who has spent a certain number of years here.
That single-parent requirement has been amended several times, but under the law in effect between 1952 and 1986 — Cruz was born in 1970 — someone must have a citizen parent who resided in the United States for at least 10 years, including five after the age of 14, in order to be considered a natural-born citizen. Cruz’s mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware, lived most of her life in the United States, and gave birth to little Rafael Edward Cruz in her 30s. Q.E.D.
So why all the brouhaha about where Obama was born, given that there’s no dispute that his mother, Ann Dunham, was a citizen? Because his mother was 18 when she gave birth to the future president in 1961 and so couldn’t have met the 5-year-post-age-14 residency requirement. Had Obama been born a year later, it wouldn’t have mattered whether that birth took place in Hawaii, Kenya, Indonesia, or anywhere else. (For those born since 1986, by the way, the single citizen parent must have only resided here for five years, at least two of which must be after the age of 14.)
In short, it may be politically advantageous for Ted Cruz to renounce his Canadian citizenship before making a run at the White House, but his eligibility for that office shouldn’t be in doubt. As Tribe and Olson said about McCain — and could’ve said about Obama, or the Mexico-born George Romney, or the Arizona-territory-born Barry Goldwater — Cruz “is certainly not the hypothetical ‘foreigner’ who John Jay and George Washington were concerned might usurp the role of Commander in Chief.â€
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/yes-ted-cruz-can-be-president
-
A whole lot of arm chair Constitutional "scholars" including a couple writers at Breitbart trying to make Mt. Everest out of a mole hill over this. It's flat out retarded.
-
A whole lot of arm chair Constitutional "scholars" including a couple writers at Breitbart trying to make Mt. Everest out of a mole hill over this. It's flat out retarded.
Ann Coulter is another one.
-
Ann Coulter is another one.
That's disappointing. This simple... already settled issue is making smart people act like idiots.
-
That's disappointing. This simple... already settled issue is making smart people act like idiots.
Ann Coulter supported Chris Christie the last time I think.
From 2011.
Ann Coulter: This country needs Chris Christie
http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/16/ann-coulter-this-country-needs-chris-christie/
-
Wife-beater and crackpot Alan Grayson weighs in.
Florida Rep. Alan Grayson, an attorney, said this week he will sue to challenge Cruz's eligibility for the presidency if the senator somehow overtakes Trump and wins the GOP presidential nomination.
Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler told U.S. News and World Report Wednesday that a potential lawsuit by Grayson is 'patent nonsense,' and added that he has examined Eleanor Cruz's U.S. birth certificate and maintained that she never became a Canadian citizen.
'Eleanor Cruz, like Ted Cruz, has never breathed a single breath of her life not being a U.S. citizen,' Tyler told the magazine, adding that Grayson would not even have legal standing to bring a lawsuit against Cruz.
Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3390647/Ted-Cruz-birther-row-court-Democrat-gets-ready-case-focusing-Cruz-s-MOTHER-wife-weighs-in.html)
-
Wife-beater and crackpot Alan Grayson weighs in.
Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3390647/Ted-Cruz-birther-row-court-Democrat-gets-ready-case-focusing-Cruz-s-MOTHER-wife-weighs-in.html)
And that is thanks to Trumps suggestion someone make it a court case.
-
And that is thanks to Trumps suggestion someone make it a court case.
Oh. Great. :whatever:
Trump is turning in to the houseguest that refuses to leave.
-
I am a huge Cruz supporter. However it is my understanding that the Supreme Court has never actually ruled as to the definition of a natural born citizen.
Keep in mind that what is being disputed is whether or not Cruz is a natural born citizen, NOT his citizenship. There is absolutely no doubt that Cruz is an American citizen. The Constitution however clearly states that one must be a 'natural born citizen' which is the issue that is being disputed.
Summarizing:
To be "natural born" is to be born on a spot of soil somewhere, and that also makes one a citizen, of jus soli countries like the United States, if that soil is part of the dominion of that country, which in U.S. law is referred to as "incorporated" territory, as distinct from a protectorate, leasehold, or other merely "administered" territory.
"Citizen at birth" is not "natural born citizenship". Those are entirely different concepts...
No Supreme Court opinion has "defined" natural born citizenship for purposes of presidential eligibility. The cases cited were either dictum or concerned ordinary citizenship sufficient to vote or hold office, but not to serve as president.
http://www.constitution.org/abus/pres_elig.htm
-
Oh. Great. :whatever:
Trump is turning in to the houseguest that refuses to leave.
I think (and I hope I am wrong) we are beginning to see the true purpose of Trump running; he may very well be the siphon for the DEMS that people have been speculating about. Attacking Cruz in this manner I find a very low blow not only to Cruz, but to conservatives, the conservative movement, the anti-establishment movement and to the party itself.
-
I am a huge Cruz supporter. However it is my understanding that the Supreme Court has never actually ruled as to the definition of a natural born citizen.
Keep in mind that what is being disputed is whether or not Cruz is a natural born citizen, NOT his citizenship. There is absolutely no doubt that Cruz is an American citizen. The Constitution however clearly states that one must be a 'natural born citizen' which is the issue that is being disputed.
Summarizing:
To be "natural born" is to be born on a spot of soil somewhere, and that also makes one a citizen, of jus soli countries like the United States, if that soil is part of the dominion of that country, which in U.S. law is referred to as "incorporated" territory, as distinct from a protectorate, leasehold, or other merely "administered" territory.
"Citizen at birth" is not "natural born citizenship". Those are entirely different concepts...
No Supreme Court opinion has "defined" natural born citizenship for purposes of presidential eligibility. The cases cited were either dictum or concerned ordinary citizenship sufficient to vote or hold office, but not to serve as president.
http://www.constitution.org/abus/pres_elig.htm
The USSC doesn't have authority to define citizenship under the Constitution. Congress does, and has, starting with the 1st Congress and revising it several times since then. Unless there has been a Constitutional issue at question, the USSC has no reason to have offered an opinion.
-
I think (and I hope I am wrong) we are beginning to see the true purpose of Trump running; he may very well be the siphon for the DEMS that people have been speculating about. Attacking Cruz in this manner I find a very low blow not only to Cruz, but to conservatives, the conservative movement, the anti-establishment movement and to the party itself.
He was asked a question, responded to it and that should have been the end of it. But no, the media loves to watch the two front runners at odds with each other. Trump should just shut up, and Cruz should ignore any more questions about his citizenship.
-
Doesn't Alan Grayson have an appointment with another bus accident, after drinking then driving again ?
-
Doesn't Alan Grayson have an appointment with another bus accident, after drinking then driving again ?
We can only hope
-
That's disappointing. This simple... already settled issue is making smart people act like idiots.
Until the Supreme Court rules definitely, the question will continue to come up, no matter how "retarded" people think it is. Legal scholars and lawyers delight in making money off those molehills and the Dems are gonna take it to court, bank on that. They aren't the ones with the candidate with that particular vulnerability.
I mean, we all "know" what the 14th Amendment was supposed to be about, and yet the anchor babies are allowed to be used to drag their entire extended clan into the US. Thank Justice Brennan in h is footnote to the majority opinion on Plyler V. Doe, 1982. So, it doesn't matter we all know what the 14th Amendment meant when one justice decides for all of us that illegals can drop a kid here and have it gain citizenship.
So, how can we say what's in their minds up on the High Bench when they've not ruled on who is a natural born American? There's nothing settled at all about this issue, not from the highest legal perspective.
-
The USSC doesn't have authority to define citizenship under the Constitution. Congress does, and has, starting with the 1st Congress and revising it several times since then. Unless there has been a Constitutional issue at question, the USSC has no reason to have offered an opinion.
I heard from one of the lawyer like pundits that the reason lawsuits against Obola's eligibility were not taken up by the Supreme Court was the lack of standing of the plantiff (no damage to complainant) however that a Dem candidate could certainly litigate against Cruz or Rubio due to being an interested party.
The Congress is also supposed to be able to define citizenship? Why then has it allowed the Supreme Court to define anchor babies as citizens?
-
Until the Supreme Court rules definitely, the question will continue to come up, no matter how "retarded" people think it is. Legal scholars and lawyers delight in making money off those molehills and the Dems are gonna take it to court, bank on that. They aren't the ones with the candidate with that particular vulnerability.
I mean, we all "know" what the 14th Amendment was supposed to be about, and yet the anchor babies are allowed to be used to drag their entire extended clan into the US. Thank Justice Brennan in h is footnote to the majority opinion on Plyler V. Doe, 1982. So, it doesn't matter we all know what the 14th Amendment meant when one justice decides for all of us that illegals can drop a kid here and have it gain citizenship.
So, how can we say what's in their minds up on the High Bench when they've not ruled on who is a natural born American? There's nothing settled at all about this issue, not from the highest legal perspective.
Sorry my friend. But this is a non issue and it'd a distraction the Libs want us to chase.
The law is clear going all the way back to 1790.
Cruz is a legal U. S. citizen and it's a fools errand to insist this go to court.
Besides...who has standing to bring this to court?
I mean seriously...do you REALLY want the possible Republican nominee to stop and deal with this in the middle of his campaign?
Trump wanted this controversy to happen because Cruz is making his move in the polls in Iowa. Hence the reason his campaign had the reporter ask the question and why Trump continues to stir the pot even though it's clear there is nothing there.
The only ones delighting in this steaming pile of shit are the Democratic and the Bush campaign.
It's a dead issue.
-
Sorry my friend. But this is a non issue and it'd a distraction the Libs want us to chase.
The law is clear going all the way back to 1790.
Cruz is a legal U. S. citizen and it's a fools errand to insist this go to court.
Besides...who has standing to bring this to court?
I mean seriously...do you REALLY want the possible Republican nominee to stop and deal with this in the middle of his campaign?
Trump wanted this controversy to happen because Cruz is making his move in the polls in Iowa. Hence the reason his campaign had the reporter ask the question and why Trump continues to stir the pot even though it's clear there is nothing there.
The only ones delighting in this steaming pile of shit are the Democratic and the Bush campaign.
It's a dead issue.
It may well not be a dead issue if Cruz or Rubio get the nomination, and I cannot see the Dems winning fairly with all the shitty baggage they're bringing to the table. So, what delightful little trick do they possibly pull out of their bag? Why, well, question the eligibility of Cruz or Rubio.
If Trump gets the nomination they can't go after him for natural born citizen, but they'll be running ads of mushroom clouds over Tehran and Baghdad trying to scare the shit out of everyone.
It's what the dirty little bastards are gonna do. Politics is a brawl. I personally want Godzilla on my team.
Trump keeps getting asked the question and since he is trailing in Iowa he is going to not whole heartedly give his seal of approval but he is certainly not the one who brought up the problem or, as you will, distraction, and while he continues to beat the shit out of the Clintons, it's others on both sides who have piled on about the natural born issue. It's staying around.
The idiot press spent alot of ink and air time on Rubio's $90 metrosexual boots this weekend. They've got the attention span of a hamster so those kinds of issues die out fairly quick, although count on the Dems dragging this up over and over. And you DO have conservatives also questioning. I don't think anyone can accuse Ann Coulter of being a liberal, and she has raised the issue too.
I know everyone thinks it's a settled issue, like climate change, but vigorous debate is going to occur. And it's better to get the question resolved NOW, not in the middle of a general election, just as it behooves the Dems to clear the deck of Hilary somehow before the FBI recommendation for indictment comes.
Who would have the standing to bring up Cruz's eligibility in court? Any candidate running against him, as the ruling one way or the other would definitely affect them!
Am I saying this shouldn't be an issue? Not really. I, for one, have had these questions all of my adult life since my husband and daughter were both born abroad, albeit to two American citizens. ARE they truly natural born citizens? Common sense says yes, but neither ever ran for president, or vice president. So, actually in a purely intellectually curious way, I DO want to know.
Hmm, maybe I would have made a good lawyer. I can bog down in the weeds with the best of them. :lmao: :lmao:
-
The law is very clear and this is a non issue. I don't know any other way to explain it.
-
As for the dems using it in the general election... Cruz will do what he's always done. Talk over the Libtards and the MSM directly to the people.
-
The law is very clear and this is a non issue. I don't know any other way to explain it.
Well, I could drag in reams of the opposite opinion off the web and the tv, but then so can you.
It might be best, seriously, for Cruz and Rubio to do as McCain did, and get a Congressional letter of citizenship, or whatever it was exactly he did wherein they voted on and confirmed his eligibility to run. If indeed it's a matter for Congress, that's a lot easier and quicker to do than attempt to get the Supreme Court to rule on it.
-
As for the dems using it in the general election... Cruz will do what he's always done. Talk over the Libtards and the MSM directly to the people.
A trait that served Reagan well.
-
Well, I could drag in reams of the opposite opinion off the web and the tv, but then so can you.
It might be best, seriously, for Cruz and Rubio to do as McCain did, and get a Congressional letter of citizenship, or whatever it was exactly he did wherein they voted on and confirmed his eligibility to run. If indeed it's a matter for Congress, that's a lot easier and quicker to do than attempt to get the Supreme Court to rule on it.
And I could shoot it all down. Starting with the first Congress in 1790... The legislation passed in 1940 and revised in 1952 that clearly defines a "natural born citizen" . And by every definition of the law AND the Constitution... Sen Cruz is a natural born citizen.
McCain was an idiot for playing this game. Again he was born on a U. S. Military base to U. S. citizens. Therefore he was a U. S. Citizen.
He fell for the Liberal trap. Cruz is smarter than that. And because they got away with it with McCain they are going to do it to any Conservative... especially Conservatives with Latin last names because Libs s believes only good Latinos are Democrat Latinos.
And unless someone handles it the way Cruz is now it won't ever stop.
The Dems have been trying this crap all the way back to Chester Arthur.
SUPREME COURT??? On what grounds?
Do you realize how long it would take to wind through the lower courts and get to the Supremes? We're talking years. This isn't something that can be adjudicated in a couple days or months.
What you're proposing is a death sentence for the first Conservative candidate with a legitimate chance to win since Reagan.
-
.. Sen Cruz is a natural born citizen.
McCain was an idiot for playing this game. Again he was born on a U. S. Military base to U. S. citizens. Therefore he is a U. S. Citizen.
McCain despises Cruz even worse than Trump because they have tangled so many times in the Senate. Would not surprise if that louse would vote for Hillary if either one of the two became the nominee.
-
Lawyer Challenging Ted Cruz Eligibility Was Suspended From Practice of Law (http://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/01/15/lawyer-challenging-ted-cruz-eligibility-was-suspended-from-practice-of-law/)
We got a winner here.
-
Lawyer Challenging Ted Cruz Eligibility Was Suspended From Practice of Law (http://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/01/15/lawyer-challenging-ted-cruz-eligibility-was-suspended-from-practice-of-law/)
We got a winner here.
Levin was reading off the list of Dems that tried to stop Obama on this same issue.
All the cases were tossed and one lawyer was sancitoned for bringing a frivilous case.
-
Well, I could drag in reams of the opposite opinion off the web and the tv, but then so can you.
It might be best, seriously, for Cruz and Rubio to do as McCain did, and get a Congressional letter of citizenship, or whatever it was exactly he did wherein they voted on and confirmed his eligibility to run. If indeed it's a matter for Congress, that's a lot easier and quicker to do than attempt to get the Supreme Court to rule on it.
Two things here. Congress hates Cruz and loves Rubio...I don't see Congress ruling in Cruz's favor. Cruz has also been very vocal on his difference of opinion with some of the justices on the Supreme Court. Though the Supreme Court isn't supposed to play politics ... they have recently ruled in favor of Obamacare and gay marriage ... I'm not so sure they would rule in Cruz's favor either.
-
Two things here. Congress hates Cruz and loves Rubio...I don't see Congress ruling in Cruz's favor. Cruz has also been very vocal on his difference of opinion with some of the justices on the Supreme Court. Though the Supreme Court isn't supposed to play politics ... they have recently ruled in favor of Obamacare and gay marriage ... I'm not so sure they would rule in Cruz's favor either.
I'm gonna be nitpicky here, for just a moment.
Congress doesn't rule. They legislate. Or they're supposed to, anyway. They vote on pieces of legislation, but i wouldn't equate that with the term rule.
The Supreme Court has played politics for a couple hundred years or more, beginning with John Marshall. The surprising thing of late wasn't them playing politics, the surprising thing was seeing a Chief Justice actually rewrite the law as passed by Congress (the Dems, that is) to accommodate his vision of what the law should be.
John Roberts is a liberal plant. Pure and simple. GWB did us no favors by appointing him as CJ.
-
I am a huge Cruz supporter. However it is my understanding that the Supreme Court has never actually ruled as to the definition of a natural born citizen.
Keep in mind that what is being disputed is whether or not Cruz is a natural born citizen, NOT his citizenship. There is absolutely no doubt that Cruz is an American citizen. The Constitution however clearly states that one must be a 'natural born citizen' which is the issue that is being disputed.
Summarizing:
To be "natural born" is to be born on a spot of soil somewhere, and that also makes one a citizen, of jus soli countries like the United States, if that soil is part of the dominion of that country, which in U.S. law is referred to as "incorporated" territory, as distinct from a protectorate, leasehold, or other merely "administered" territory.
"Citizen at birth" is not "natural born citizenship". Those are entirely different concepts...
[/color][/i]
No Supreme Court opinion has "defined" natural born citizenship for purposes of presidential eligibility. The cases cited were either dictum or concerned ordinary citizenship sufficient to vote or hold office, but not to serve as president.
http://www.constitution.org/abus/pres_elig.htm
I know the quoted words are suspect but it occurred to me that using that logic, terrorist "Syed Rizwan Farook" could be president ? :thatsright:
.
-
Newsflash,
Lib Lawyers are unethical.
-
Newsflash,
Lib Lawyers are unethical.
In related news, water is wet, and the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.
-
Levin was reading off the list of Dems that tried to stop Obama on this same issue.
All the cases were tossed and one lawyer was sancitoned for bringing a frivilous case.
I know it was the Hillary Clinton supporters who started the Barack Obama birther movement. Conservatives were late to it.
Bombshell: ‘Washington Post’ Confirms Hillary Clinton Started the Birther Movement
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/09/26/washington-post-confirms-hillary-clinton-started-the-birther-movement/
-
I know it was the Hillary Clinton supporters who started the Barack Obama birther movement. Conservatives were late to it.
Bombshell: ‘Washington Post’ Confirms Hillary Clinton Started the Birther Movement
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/09/26/washington-post-confirms-hillary-clinton-started-the-birther-movement/
Newsflash...
Lib journalist at LA Times first to call Barak H. Obama "Magic Negro".
-
Newsflash...
Lib journalist at LA Times first to call Barak H. Obama "Magic Negro".
Somehow that was ignored by the media. :stoner:
-
Somehow that was ignored by the media. :stoner:
Much like they ignored the fact that the Hillary camp raised the birther issue about Obama.
-
Devil's advocate: I don't see how a registered voter can be denied a chance for a lawsuit based upon injury. A voter may be affected because the candidate he prefers may be in a "compromised" election based upon vote allocation, thereby affecting his actual vote, which constitutes damage. Frankly, any lawyer that doesn't argue that very real problem and introduce close federal election results (including Florida 2000 presidential) is not being very thorough, and judge that rules against the continuance of the voter's lawsuit for that reason is being selective toward his judgment.
THAT SAID: Cruz has standing based upon having a parent whom is a citizen of America. Ironically, two foreigners can hop the border, drop their kid, and immediately go back to Mexico, and that kid is legal to be president based upon current law, even if that kid spent his entire life in TJ running drugs and guns for El Chapo, while the baby of an American servicemember with a German spouse born in a German (not on-US base) hospital is not eligible, based upon the irrational argument by the lib birthers. There are only two ways to be a citizen: natural born, or naturalized. Cruz was never naturalized because he has always been natural born.