AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Here is an interesting article that covers Senator Cruz being a natural born citizen. Also shows some similarities with Obama being a natural born citizen.

http://comradeconservative.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/ted-cruz-born-in-canada/

hprinze Loc: Central Florida

Neither Cruz or Obama are natural born citizens of the U.S. though one or both may be citizens.

All citizens are not natural born citizens.

Natural born citizen was defined by the Supreme Court in 1875. The definition is born in the U.S of two U.S. citizen parents (pliral). That is a binding precedent and is the only definition that counts.

The 14th amendment spells out the requirements for being a citizen. That amendment DOES NOT define natural born citizen.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

If all citizens are not natural born citizens then no citizens are natural born citizens. If no citizens are natural born citizens, then no citizens can be President of the United States. Some citizens have been President of the United States, ex: John Quincy Adams, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, & Ronald Reagan.

I'm not aware of what Supreme Court from 1875 you are explicitly referring to, but I suppose that you are refering to the case of Minor v. Happersett. In that case, the Court states that "Congress shall have power "to establish a uniform rule of naturalization." Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization. The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens."

They further go on to state that: "Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization Congress, as early as 1790, provided "that any alien, being a free white person," might be admitted as a citizen of the United States, and that the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under twenty-one years of age at the time of such naturalization, should also be considered citizens of the United States, and that the children of citizens of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens. These provisions thus enacted have, in substance, been retained in all the naturalization laws adopted since. In 1855, however, the last provision was somewhat extended, and all persons theretofore born or thereafter to be born out of the limits of the jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were, or should be at the time of their birth, citizens of the United States, were declared to be citizens also."

Furthermore, the Court states that "it is apparent that from the commencement of the legislation upon this subject alien women and alien minors could be made citizens by naturalization, and we think it will not be contended that this would have been done if it had not been supposed that native women and native minors were already citizens by birth."

All of this flatly contradicts what you have said. It points out that some citizens are formed by naturalization. All citizens are not natural born citizens is contradicted by the Court pointing out that some citizens are natural born citizens. More than likely, these people were listed as President, like Ronald Reagan, since Article II section One states that "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."

Those uniformity of naturalization laws in our current era, which are passed by Congress, would allow for naturalization if at least one parent is an American citizen.

At the most, no person who is neither a natural born citizen nor a citizen, are eligible to the Office of President. All person who are natural born citizen or a citizen are eligible to the Office of President.

Schuler Loc: Santa Fe NM

well-let me see now--George Romney (candidate for President) born in MEXICO--Ted Cruz (wannabe candidate for President-or is it Emporer?)--born in Canada--Obama-born in Hawaii, United States of America -(elected TWICE President of the US)-I may be wrong here-but last time I checked Canada and Mexico are foreign countries--Hawaii is part of the United States-and oh yeah what about 'Ol John McCain'--born in Panama-(not part of the contiguous US)-hmmmm--all those wannabe Presidents born outside of America-Republicans--the only one born in America- a Democrat--so just what 'IS' your argument about Obama's birth-and p**********l legitimacy-if you think 'ya gots one'??-heh-heh-heh-?

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

As Supreme Court points out in Minor v. Harper, they bring up that "Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization Congress, as early as 1790, provided "that any alien, being a free white person," might be admitted as a citizen of the United States, and that the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under twenty-one years of age at the time of such naturalization, should also be considered citizens of the United States, and that the children of citizens of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens."

So George Romney (born in Mexico), Ted Cruz (born in Canada), & John McCain (born in Panama), would all be natural born citizens, and thus would be eligible to hold Office of President, just like Barack Obama (born in Hawaii) or Ronald Reagan (born in Illinois).

tato Loc: San Diego

There are three types of citizenship officially recognized; Citizen born within the United States; Naturalized citizen; and non citizen. That's it. Citizen by birth, citizen by choice, non citizen.

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

Amen hprinze! Now where is "Rule of Law " concerning the precedence of Minor v Happerset?

Karzen

Seems to me that natural "born" would apply to any person born on American soil (like Hawaii for example) regardless of who their parents were. On the other hand for someone born in a foreign country (like Canada for example) to be a natural born citizen BOTH their parents would have to be American citizens. Seems that if the Republican party ends up nominating Cruz they will have a LEGITIMENT birther controversy to deal with since he was born in Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father.

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

Obama is not a natural born citizen of the U.S. and therefore is illegally occupying the office of president..

http://theghostfighters.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/natural-born-citizen-for-dummies/


The above link leads to a clear and simple explanation of the definition of natural born citizen as defined by the Supreme Court. The Supremes definition is the only definition that counts. It is a binding precedent of the highest court and it rules in spite of so many who attempt to confuse and obfuscate the issue.

There have been over 100 court cases filed seeking to get a ruling on his eligibility. Every one of those cases has been dismissed over some kind of technicality without a hearing. Not one court or judge has ruled that Obama is or is not eligible to be president. Every court, including the Supreme Court, has refused to rule on the matter, obviously because they know he is ineligible and they are afraid to make the ruling. In a news interview, Justice Clarence Thomas stated that the court is evading the issue.

This is not the first time the SCOTUS has evaded issuing a ruling because they knew their ruling would be unpopular and gain powerful enemies for themselves, nor will it be the last.

Example- A few years back, a south Florida prostitute was convicted of prostitution and through a series of appeals over several years, the case went to the Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case. It’s obvious to me that an adult woman has a legal and constitutional right to engage in consensual sex for any reason, including for money. It was also obvious to the Supremes so they sumply refused to hear the case rather than issue a ruling that would gain them enemies, like the powerful religious organizations.

All the hullabaloo about Obama’s birthplace and his phoney birth certificates is actually irrelevant because the fact hat his father was not a U.S. citizen means that Obama is not a natural born citizen, regardless of where he was born.. The video at the above link gives a plain and simple explanation of natural born citizenship, as defined by the Supreme Court, The case of Minor v Happerset can be googled and studied at length to verify the facts put forth in the video,

Obama’s reach for and gaining of the presidency was no accident. It has been planned on and worked for by his handlers for years. Some in congress have made a number of attempts over the years to remove the requirement that a president be a natural born citizen.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

You missed the fourth type of citizen. A child born to military personnel stationed in a foreign country.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

George Romney withdrew from running. John McCain's father was a serving member of the US military officially stationed in Panama. Many people fail to understand the children born to members of the US military while officially stationed in foreign countries are US citizens.

tato Loc: San Diego

They would be classified as having been born in this country.

Vic Freits

That's bull green slime from below the bull's tail. One must be a u.s. born citizen... Not "or a citizen". That particular misleading piece was added by the conservatives.. I didn't mind John McCain being born in Panama, but this subject by the name of............ Watchamacallit? NO WAY!

If that's the case we would have had the gov. Puerto Rico president, since they are u.s. born citizens. In fact ... they have more right of being candidates for president than this "FULGENCIO BATISTA" conservative.

Vic Freits

Since when ... and when was it that CANADA became our 51st. state of the UNION?

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

To whom are you posting. The use of the "Quote Reply" directly replies to an indivdual.