|
For all u Obama born in Kenya folks; Natural born citizens.
|
|
Topic Started: Dec 20 2015, 11:33 AM (587 Views)
|
|
bachophile
|
Dec 20 2015, 11:33 AM
Post #1
|
- Posts:
- 11,869
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- April 19, 2005
|
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/26/ted-cruz-born-canada-eligible-run-president-update/
|
|
"I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen
|
| |
|
jon-nyc
|
Dec 20 2015, 11:56 AM
Post #2
|
- Posts:
- 54,361
- Group:
- Moderators
- Member
- #119
- Joined:
- April 22, 2005
|
Yeah, haven't you noticed that constant drumbeat from the right about Cruz's ineligibility? It's downright deafening.
|
|
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
|
| |
|
Axtremus
|
Dec 20 2015, 12:32 PM
Post #3
|
- Posts:
- 35,678
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- April 18, 2005
|
Difference is, Kenya established a national holiday, the Obama Day, to celebrate Obama being elected POTUS. Canada would likely be too embarrassed by Cruz to do anything of the sort even if Cruz wins (which he won't).
|
|
|
| |
|
George K
|
Dec 20 2015, 12:33 PM
Post #4
|
- Posts:
- 88,966
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
(#notabirther)
I think the difference between the cases is that Cruz immediately released his birth certificate, indicating parentage and place of birth two years before he began his campaign (2013, according to the article).
In Obama's case, it had to be dragged out of him, and, of course, that raised the suspicions of "what are you hiding?" He released the short form in 2008.
"Oh yeah, where's the LONG form???" was the cry, and it took another 3 years to release that.
Edit to add: There is a myriad of other things unclear, inconsistent, hidden, mysterious about Obama that feeds that mindset.
Edited by George K, Dec 20 2015, 12:35 PM.
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |
|
jon-nyc
|
Dec 20 2015, 12:43 PM
Post #5
|
- Posts:
- 54,361
- Group:
- Moderators
- Member
- #119
- Joined:
- April 22, 2005
|
But, however quickly it was produced, Cruz's birth certificate proves his foreign birth. The very (unfounded) concern they had about Obama has never been denied in the case of Cruz.
|
|
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
|
| |
|
George K
|
Dec 20 2015, 12:47 PM
Post #6
|
- Posts:
- 88,966
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
I understand that, but to the mindset of the birther, the delays make all the difference ("THey're forging it!"). Despited all the investigations, they assumed that the records were forged. Birthers had no problem with McCain's foreign birth either.
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |
|
Copper
|
Dec 20 2015, 03:12 PM
Post #7
|
- Posts:
- 29,871
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #426
- Joined:
- February 14, 2007
|
- jon-nyc
- Dec 20 2015, 12:43 PM
But, however quickly it was produced, Cruz's birth certificate proves his foreign birth. The very (unfounded) concern they had about Obama has never been denied in the case of Cruz.
I don't believe the Kenyan birth was the whole problem.
Over the years there have been several president and vice-president candidates who had been born outside the country.
I believe there was a timeframe/statute of limitations that was involved.
Then there is also the problem with the lies and cover-up.
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
|
| |
|
John D'Oh
|
Dec 20 2015, 03:50 PM
Post #8
|
- Posts:
- 53,798
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #276
- Joined:
- October 19, 2005
|
I think the thing that really bothered the majority of birthers was the fact that Obama got more votes than either McCain or Romney.
|
|
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
|
| |
|
Copper
|
Dec 20 2015, 04:04 PM
Post #9
|
- Posts:
- 29,871
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #426
- Joined:
- February 14, 2007
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories
From the wiki: - Quote:
-
Whether Obama having been born outside the U.S. would have invalidated his U.S. citizenship at birth is debated. Political commentator Andrew Malcolm, of the Los Angeles Times, wrote that Obama would still be eligible for the presidency, regardless of where he was born, because his mother was an American citizen, saying that Obama's mother "could have been on Mars when wee Barry emerged and he'd still be American."[63] A contrary view is promoted by UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh, who has said that in the hypothetical scenario that Obama was born outside the U.S., he would not be a natural-born citizen, since the then-applicable law would have required Obama's mother to have been in the U.S. at least "five years after the age of 14", but Ann Dunham was three months shy of her 19th birthday when Obama was born
The law is apparently silent on whether a 2-bit thug is a special case.
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
|
| |
|
John D'Oh
|
Dec 20 2015, 04:16 PM
Post #10
|
- Posts:
- 53,798
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #276
- Joined:
- October 19, 2005
|
A politician who is less than open and honest. Whatever next?
|
|
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
|
| |
|
Riley
|
Dec 21 2015, 12:35 AM
Post #11
|
- Posts:
- 17,219
- Group:
- Moderators
- Member
- #255
- Joined:
- September 1, 2005
|
- Copper
- Dec 20 2015, 04:04 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theoriesFrom the wiki: - Quote:
-
Whether Obama having been born outside the U.S. would have invalidated his U.S. citizenship at birth is debated. Political commentator Andrew Malcolm, of the Los Angeles Times, wrote that Obama would still be eligible for the presidency, regardless of where he was born, because his mother was an American citizen, saying that Obama's mother "could have been on Mars when wee Barry emerged and he'd still be American."[63] A contrary view is promoted by UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh, who has said that in the hypothetical scenario that Obama was born outside the U.S., he would not be a natural-born citizen, since the then-applicable law would have required Obama's mother to have been in the U.S. at least "five years after the age of 14", but Ann Dunham was three months shy of her 19th birthday when Obama was born
The law is apparently silent on whether a 2-bit thug is a special case. That's silly. So children of teen pregnancies are somehow ineligible to be president?
|
|
|
| |
|
Catseye
|
Dec 21 2015, 02:38 AM
Post #12
|
- Posts:
- 5,135
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,390
- Joined:
- March 5, 2015
|
From Copper's Wiki citation:
- Quote:
-
Whether Obama having been born outside the U.S. would have invalidated his U.S. citizenship at birth is debated. Political commentator Andrew Malcolm, of the Los Angeles Times, wrote that Obama would still be eligible for the presidency, regardless of where he was born, because his mother was an American citizen, . . .
From http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/26/ted-cruz-born-canada-eligible-run-president-update:
In 2013, the first-term senator ... released his birth certificate, which shows his mother was born in Delaware and his father was born in Cuba . . .
[T]he constitutional requirements for a presidential candidate created by the Founding Fathers are concise but not readily clear. Two provisions are obvious: The candidate must be 35 years of age and a resident of the United States for 14 years. The third qualification: He or she must be a "natural born citizen."
What does it mean to be a "natural born citizen"? Most legal experts contend it means someone is a citizen from birth and doesn't have to go through a naturalization process to become a citizen. If that's the definition, then Cruz is a natural born citizen by being born to an American mother and having her citizenship at birth.
|
|
"How awful a knowledge of the truth can be." -- Sophocles, Oedipus Rex
|
| |
|
jon-nyc
|
Dec 21 2015, 04:26 AM
Post #13
|
- Posts:
- 54,361
- Group:
- Moderators
- Member
- #119
- Joined:
- April 22, 2005
|
Sure, Catseye. Try explaining that to the right wingers who keep on with their 'Cruz is ineligible' drumbeat.
|
|
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
|
| |
|
Copper
|
Dec 21 2015, 07:38 AM
Post #14
|
- Posts:
- 29,871
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #426
- Joined:
- February 14, 2007
|
Mr. Cruz is ineligible because he is kind of unattractive.
Although in a contest with Ms. Clinton it could be close.
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
|
| |
|
Luke's Dad
|
Dec 21 2015, 09:13 AM
Post #15
|
- Posts:
- 25,628
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #8
- Joined:
- April 18, 2005
|
- Riley
- Dec 21 2015, 12:35 AM
- Copper
- Dec 20 2015, 04:04 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theoriesFrom the wiki: - Quote:
-
Whether Obama having been born outside the U.S. would have invalidated his U.S. citizenship at birth is debated. Political commentator Andrew Malcolm, of the Los Angeles Times, wrote that Obama would still be eligible for the presidency, regardless of where he was born, because his mother was an American citizen, saying that Obama's mother "could have been on Mars when wee Barry emerged and he'd still be American."[63] A contrary view is promoted by UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh, who has said that in the hypothetical scenario that Obama was born outside the U.S., he would not be a natural-born citizen, since the then-applicable law would have required Obama's mother to have been in the U.S. at least "five years after the age of 14", but Ann Dunham was three months shy of her 19th birthday when Obama was born
The law is apparently silent on whether a 2-bit thug is a special case.
That's silly. So children of teen pregnancies are somehow ineligible to be president?  It has nothing to do with her age at pregnanc and everthing to do with her age when leaving the US.
|
|
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
|
| |
|
Copper
|
Dec 21 2015, 10:01 AM
Post #16
|
- Posts:
- 29,871
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #426
- Joined:
- February 14, 2007
|
- Riley
- Dec 21 2015, 12:35 AM
That's silly.
Yes, that is in general his idea of law.
It is an area in which he and Ms. Clinton agree.
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
|
| |
|
Valdez
|
Dec 22 2015, 01:11 PM
Post #17
|
- Posts:
- 439
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,353
- Joined:
- June 5, 2014
|
- Luke's Dad
- Dec 21 2015, 09:13 AM
- Riley
- Dec 21 2015, 12:35 AM
- Copper
- Dec 20 2015, 04:04 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theoriesFrom the wiki: - Quote:
-
Whether Obama having been born outside the U.S. would have invalidated his U.S. citizenship at birth is debated. Political commentator Andrew Malcolm, of the Los Angeles Times, wrote that Obama would still be eligible for the presidency, regardless of where he was born, because his mother was an American citizen, saying that Obama's mother "could have been on Mars when wee Barry emerged and he'd still be American."[63] A contrary view is promoted by UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh, who has said that in the hypothetical scenario that Obama was born outside the U.S., he would not be a natural-born citizen, since the then-applicable law would have required Obama's mother to have been in the U.S. at least "five years after the age of 14", but Ann Dunham was three months shy of her 19th birthday when Obama was born
The law is apparently silent on whether a 2-bit thug is a special case.
That's silly. So children of teen pregnancies are somehow ineligible to be president? 
It has nothing to do with her age at pregnanc and everthing to do with her age when leaving the US. You have to remember that professor Volokh is not submitting a legal opinion or even a brief. He is blogging. At the time obama was born, I think the wording for the retention qualifications was "must retain a presence". This is not the same as legal residency. I believe the rule at the time was to retain a presence you had to physically be in the US or territories at least once in every 12 months. With that, it would be possible to retain a presence without staying the entire last year. Subsequent laws limited the retention qualifications and some were retroactive.
Volokh, rightly so, claims no proof exists obama wasn't born in Hawaii before he submits his hypothetical scenario.
Juan
Edited by Valdez, Dec 22 2015, 01:16 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Copper
|
Dec 22 2015, 02:07 PM
Post #18
|
- Posts:
- 29,871
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #426
- Joined:
- February 14, 2007
|
- Valdez
- Dec 22 2015, 01:11 PM
Volokh, rightly so, claims no proof exists obama wasn't born in Hawaii before he submits his hypothetical scenario.
Juan
If that is really "rightly so" that is one special guy.
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
|
| |
|
Valdez
|
Dec 22 2015, 02:24 PM
Post #19
|
- Posts:
- 439
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,353
- Joined:
- June 5, 2014
|
- Copper
- Dec 22 2015, 02:07 PM
- Valdez
- Dec 22 2015, 01:11 PM
Volokh, rightly so, claims no proof exists obama wasn't born in Hawaii before he submits his hypothetical scenario.
Juan
If that is really "rightly so" that is one special guy. Right. No doubt in the same way you're "special".
Juan
|
|
|
| |
|
George K
|
Jan 13 2016, 04:18 PM
Post #20
|
- Posts:
- 88,966
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
- jon-nyc
- Dec 20 2015, 11:56 AM
Yeah, haven't you noticed that constant drumbeat from the right about Cruz's ineligibility? It's downright deafening. Ann Coulter agrees with Jon.
- Quote:
-
If Ted Cruz is a "natural born citizen," eligible to be president, what was all the fuss about Obama being born in Kenya? No one disputed that Obama's mother was a U.S. Citizen.
Cruz was born in Canada to an American citizen mother and an alien father. If he's eligible to be president, then so was Obama -- even if he'd been born in Kenya.
But...not really. I got yer drum right here:
- Quote:
-
As with most constitutional arguments, whether or not Cruz is a "natural born citizen" under the Constitution apparently comes down to whether you support Cruz for president. (Or, for liberals, whether you think U.S. citizenship is a worthless thing that ought to be extended to every person on the planet.)
Forgetting how corrupt constitutional analysis had become, I briefly believed lawyers who assured me that Cruz was a “natural born citizen,” eligible to run for president, and “corrected” myself in a single tweet three years ago. That tweet’s made quite a stir!
But the Constitution is the Constitution, and Cruz is not a "natural born citizen." (Never let the kids at Kinko's do your legal research.)
I said so long before Trump declared for president, back when Cruz was still my guy -- as lovingly captured on tape last April by the Obama birthers (www.birtherreport.com/2015/04/shocker-anti-birther...
The Constitution says: "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."
The phrase "natural born" is a legal term of art that goes back to Calvin's Case, in the British Court of Common Pleas, reported in 1608 by Lord Coke. The question before the court was whether Calvin -- a Scot -- could own land in England, a right permitted only to English subjects.
The court ruled that because Calvin was born after the king of Scotland had added England to his realm, Calvin was born to the king of both realms and had all the rights of an Englishman.
It was the king on whose soil he was born and to whom he owed his allegiance -- not his Scottish blood -- that determined his rights.
Not everyone born on the king's soil would be "natural born." Calvin's Case expressly notes that the children of aliens who were not obedient to the king could never be "natural" subjects, despite being "born upon his soil." (Sorry, anchor babies.) However, they still qualified for food stamps, Section 8 housing and Medicaid.
Relying on English common law for the meaning of "natural born," the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that "the acquisition of citizenship by being born abroad of American parents" was left to Congress "in the exercise of the power conferred by the Constitution to establish an uniform rule of naturalization." (U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898); Rogers v. Bellei (1971); Zivotofsky v. Kerry (2015), Justice Thomas, concurring.)
A child born to American parents outside of U.S. territory may be a citizen the moment he is born -- but only by "naturalization," i.e., by laws passed by Congress. If Congress has to write a law to make you a citizen, you're not "natural born."
Because Cruz's citizenship comes from the law, not the Constitution, as late as 1934, he would not have had "any conceivable claim to United States citizenship. For more than a century and a half, no statute was of assistance. Maternal citizenship afforded no benefit" -- as the Supreme Court put it in Rogers v. Bellei (1971).
That would make no sense if Cruz were a "natural born citizen" under the Constitution. But as the Bellei Court said: "Persons not born in the United States acquire citizenship by birth only as provided by Acts of Congress." (There's an exception for the children of ambassadors, but Cruz wasn't that.)
So Cruz was born a citizen -- under our naturalization laws -- but is not a "natural born citizen" -- under our Constitution.
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |
|
Copper
|
Jan 13 2016, 04:26 PM
Post #21
|
- Posts:
- 29,871
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #426
- Joined:
- February 14, 2007
|
- George K
- Jan 13 2016, 04:18 PM
But...not really. I got yer drum right here:
Yup, editorial page of today's post, it's pretty clear, I am eligible to president Mr. Cruz is not.
- Quote:
-
Ted Cruz is not eligible to be president Mary Brigid McManamon January 12
Mary Brigid McManamon is a constitutional law professor at Widener University’s Delaware Law School.
Donald Trump is actually right about something: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is not a natural-born citizen and therefore is not eligible to be president or vice president of the United States.
The Constitution provides that “No person except a natural born Citizen . . . shall be eligible to the Office of President.” The concept of “natural born” comes from common law, and it is that law the Supreme Court has said we must turn to for the concept’s definition. On this subject, common law is clear and unambiguous. The 18th-century English jurist William Blackstone, the preeminent authority on it, declared natural-born citizens are “such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England,” while aliens are “such as are born out of it.” The key to this division is the assumption of allegiance to one’s country of birth. The Americans who drafted the Constitution adopted this principle for the United States. James Madison, known as the “father of the Constitution,” stated, “It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. . . . [And] place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States.”
Cruz is, of course, a U.S. citizen. As he was born in Canada, he is not natural-born. His mother, however, is an American, and Congress has provided by statute for the naturalization of children born abroad to citizens. Because of the senator’s parentage, he did not have to follow the lengthy naturalization process that aliens without American parents must undergo. Instead, Cruz was naturalized at birth. This provision has not always been available. For example, there were several decades in the 19th century when children of Americans born abroad were not given automatic naturalization.
Article I of the Constitution grants Congress the power to naturalize an alien — that is, Congress may remove an alien’s legal disabilities, such as not being allowed to vote. But Article II of the Constitution expressly adopts the legal status of the natural-born citizen and requires that a president possess that status. However we feel about allowing naturalized immigrants to reach for the stars, the Constitution must be amended before one of them can attain the office of president. Congress simply does not have the power to convert someone born outside the United States into a natural-born citizen.
Let me be clear: I am not a so-called birther. I am a legal historian. President Obama is without question eligible for the office he serves. The distinction between the president and Cruz is simple: The president was born within the United States, and the senator was born outside of it. That is a distinction with a difference.
In this election cycle, numerous pundits have declared that Cruz is eligible to be president. They rely on a supposed consensus among legal experts. This notion appears to emanate largely from a recent comment in the Harvard Law Review Forum by former solicitors general Neal Katyal and Paul Clement. In trying to put the question of who is a natural-born citizen to rest, however, the authors misunderstand, misapply and ignore the relevant law.
First, although Katyal and Clement correctly declare that the Supreme Court has recognized that common law is useful to explain constitutional terms, they ignore that law. Instead, they rely on three radical 18th-century British statutes. While it is understandable for a layperson to make such a mistake, it is unforgivable for two lawyers of such experience to equate the common law with statutory law. The common law was unequivocal: Natural-born subjects had to be born in English territory. The then-new statutes were a revolutionary departure from that law.
Second, the authors appropriately ask the question whether the Constitution includes the common-law definition or the statutory approach. But they fail to examine any U.S. sources for the answer. Instead, Katyal and Clement refer to the brand-new British statutes as part of a “longstanding tradition” and conclude that the framers followed that law because they “would have been intimately familiar with these statutes.” But when one reviews all the relevant American writings of the early period, including congressional debates, well-respected treatises and Supreme Court precedent, it becomes clear that the common-law definition was accepted in the United States, not the newfangled British statutory approach.
Third, Katyal and Clement put much weight on the first U.S. naturalization statute, enacted in 1790. Because it contains the phrase “natural born,” they infer that such citizens must include children born abroad to American parents. The first Congress, however, had no such intent. The debates on the matter reveal that the congressmen were aware that such children were not citizens and had to be naturalized; hence, Congress enacted a statute to provide for them. Moreover, that statute did not say the children were natural born, only that they should “be considered as” such. Finally, as soon as Madison, then a member of Congress, was assigned to redraft the statute in 1795, he deleted the phrase “natural born,” and it has never reappeared in a naturalization statute.
When discussing the meaning of a constitutional term, it is important to go beyond secondary sources and look to the law itself. And on this issue, the law is clear: The framers of the Constitution required the president of the United States to be born in the United States.
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy
|
| |
|
George K
|
Jan 13 2016, 04:28 PM
Post #22
|
- Posts:
- 88,966
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #249
- Joined:
- August 4, 2005
|
- Copper
- Jan 13 2016, 04:26 PM
I am eligible to president ::shudder::
|
A guide to GKSR: Click
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.
I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18
|
| |