Coulter: Ted Cruz might not be eligible for the presidency

posted at 6:01 pm on August 13, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite and MFP, forget the legal niceties about what “natural born” might or should mean and look at this from a court’s perspective. Realistically, no judge is going to disqualify a national figure who stands a real chance of being the nominee of one of the two major parties unless the law leaves them no wiggle room to rule otherwise. Tens of millions of Americans would be willing to vote for Ted Cruz; to strike him from the ballot on a technicality in an ambiguous case would be momentously undemocratic. Against that backdrop, the Supreme Court would almost certainly end up reading “natural born” in the narrowest way, excluding anyone who was born abroad of two non-citizen parents but including everyone else. Cruz, who was born in Canada but whose mother was a U.S. citizen, would qualify, not only for the reason Ace gives here but more broadly because courts don’t want to be seen as hard-ass enforcers of what’s perceived by many to be an unusually archaic bit of the Constitution. They’ll dump a true foreigner because they have to. They don’t have to dump the son of an American citizen like Cruz, so they won’t. Take it to the bank.

But never mind that. Given the angst and ambiguity over the “natural born” clause in the last two cycles, why not pass an amendment to replace it with something like, say, a 25-year residency requirement? The point of the clause was to make sure that rich foreigners couldn’t cross the ocean and buy their way into the presidency, which wasn’t a baseless concern for a group of former British subjects who worried about loyalists to the throne subverting the revolution. In practice, though, it means that someone who’s born on U.S. soil but lives their entire life abroad, only to return and run for president decades later, is constitutionally more trustworthy than someone like Cruz who was born abroad but has lived his entire life here. Does anyone question whether Ted Cruz, decades later, might be more loyal to Canada than to the U.S.? Right at this moment, House Republicans are gearing up to pass a variation of the DREAM Act that would grant citizenship to illegals who were brought here at a young age by their parents on the theory that the place where you’re raised is more likely to shape your patriotic loyalty than the happenstance of your birth. If those kids are trustworthy enough to help decide at the polls who the president should be, why shouldn’t they be eligible for the presidency themselves? In a democracy, the president is, or should be, drawn from the citizenry. People who take certain draconian disqualifying actions, like committing felonies, are an exception, but what action has Cruz taken? Replace “natural born” with a residency requirement, which gives people the power to prove their loyalty, and you solve that problem.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 8

Why am I not surprised that ‘Acid Ann’ is a birther wacko.
Ann-you are DISMISSED!

annoyinglittletwerp on August 13, 2013 at 6:03 PM

Of course Ann would say that… she’s still in love with fat-boy Christy.

Hill60 on August 13, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Heck, why bother with any requirements, at all? Iffen you’re tall enough to put your dollar on the bar, drink up!

locomotivebreath1901 on August 13, 2013 at 6:05 PM

But Romneycare is teh awesome!!!

besser tot als rot on August 13, 2013 at 6:05 PM

lefty birthers come out of the woodwork in 5…4…3

cmsinaz on August 13, 2013 at 6:05 PM

Before some of you start using the tactics of the left and calling folks birthers. Consider this. Did you honestly think this wasn’t going to come up as an issue.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Oh great, a birther thread. I think I’ll go for a root canal.

rbj on August 13, 2013 at 6:08 PM

What’s good for the goose is not good for the gander, eh? The Washington establishment is only interested in eligibility, it seems, when it can be used to challenge freedom-loving candidates.

Cara C on August 13, 2013 at 6:09 PM

Did you honestly think this wasn’t going to come up as an issue.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Hmmm I wonder why it wasn’t for McCain.
/

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:09 PM

So no outcry about Obama trying to violate the separation of powers by bypassing Congress and running things by fiat — but raise the possibility of Cruz running for President and we’re back to regarding the Constitution as something with the force of law again (or at least using it as a pretext for getting what we want and suppressing what we don’t).

Aitch748 on August 13, 2013 at 6:09 PM

Seems to me Allah the biggest issue is whether it is parent or parents. Not much of an issue as to where someone is born.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:10 PM

‘Texas Republican Sen. Cruz eligible to be president should he decide to run’

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/19/cruz-eligible-presidential-run/

Pork-Chop on August 13, 2013 at 6:10 PM

All he needs to do is say he was born in Hawaii, and photoshop a birth certificate. It worked for the muslim.

rightside on August 13, 2013 at 6:11 PM

Before some of you start using the tactics of the left and calling folks birthers. Consider this. Did you honestly think this wasn’t going to come up as an issue.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Birthers is not a lefty term, there are plenty of people here on the right who understand that natural born citizen means citizen by birth and mocked them as well.

cpaulus on August 13, 2013 at 6:12 PM

The only way the Constitution gets changed is via an amendment, and that ain’t gonna happen.

Cruz is considered a natural-born citizen via the fact his mother was a US Citizen, and she was not living abroad permanently.

FWIW, US Military bases, embassies, consulates, etc, are considered US Soil, and anyone posted to them for duty who has children born there, or even in a civilian hospital off-post, is considered a natural-born citizen. Same if a child is born aboard a US Warship while at sea.

TKindred on August 13, 2013 at 6:12 PM

to strike him from the ballot on a technicality in an ambiguous case would be momentously undemocratic.

What’s your point? Lots of “momentously undemocratic” things going around these days. Of course, this would only happen if he was an actual threat to Hillary!, our next sovereign queen.

He won’t be (or any other GOP nominee for that matter), so it’s all academic. The fix is in, so we don’t have to worry about who the next POTUS will be any more.

AUINSC on August 13, 2013 at 6:13 PM

Ugh. Shut up Coulter.

terryannonline on August 13, 2013 at 6:13 PM

I think one of the concerns is that a non-”natural born” citizen would be more hesitant to take action against their homeland and/or show exceptional favor towards it.

Imagine if the elected president was born in Russia and left his/her family there. Russia launches a nuke strike on the U.S. Do you think the president in such a scenario could reach an unbiased decision to retaliate against their homeland.

I understand that you can compare different levels of trustworthiness under a myriad of scenarios. But I feel like this formulation (“natural born is anyone not born abroad to two foreigners”) is probably one of the few that can be articulated and yet still respond to the concerns of the Founders.

blammm on August 13, 2013 at 6:13 PM

Ted Crus’s take.

“I can tell you where I was born and who my parents were. And then as a legal matter, others can worry about that. I’m not going to engage,”

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:14 PM

TKindred on August 13, 2013 at 6:12 PM

You make too much sense.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:14 PM

cpaulus on August 13, 2013 at 6:12 PM

Fair enough. The popularizing of the term occurred when and by whom. Recent history please.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:16 PM

Yet you could be President if your parents came here and had you here and then went back home with you with no intent on coming back. Hmmmm, screwy.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:17 PM

Sorry for the typo, should read Ted Cruz’s take. ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:18 PM

Of course Ann would say that… she’s still in love with fat-boy Christy.

Hill60 on August 13, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Conservatives really need to tighten up on who gets conservative press credentials. Coulter, Scarborough, Rove….. These people are not working in the interest of conservatism.

Happy Nomad on August 13, 2013 at 6:19 PM

Here we go again.

Philly on August 13, 2013 at 6:19 PM

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:07 PM

it shouldn’t come up if the left was ok with barack then they should be with cruz but you know they won’t tolerate it….

cmsinaz on August 13, 2013 at 6:19 PM

I absolutely love Ted Cruz, but right is right….,strong> Cruz is ineligible to run or hold office as President. I would vote for him for any other office that he ran for.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:20 PM

On first blush, I think the argument that “natural born” could include citizens such as Cruz (i.e., statutory rather than 14A citizens) proves too much. By that logic Congress could expand or contract the constitutional definition of a “natural born” citizen simply by passing a statute expanding the scope of those eligible to become citizens at birth. Indeed, Congress could pass a law making all British-born persons US citizens at birth, and each of them would be constitutionally eligible to be president (even though they were not prior to that law’s enactment). I’m not aware of another constitutional provision that Congress can expand or contract without a constitutional amendment.

Nonetheless, I doubt anyone could ever bring a successful legal challenge to a Cruz candidacy, both because of the optics/equitable considerations AP mentioned and because it would be exceedingly difficult to establish Art III standing.

righty45 on August 13, 2013 at 6:21 PM

Coulter is only saying this in hopes of boosting Christie.

ButterflyDragon on August 13, 2013 at 6:23 PM

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:20 PM

You do realize that the whole birther crap that you’ve fallen for was first brought up by a pro-Hillary dim named Phillip Berg-right?
Barry-as loathsome as he is-was born in HAWAII.
Ted Cruz IS eligible to be president.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 13, 2013 at 6:25 PM

cmsinaz on August 13, 2013 at 6:19 PM

Oh its going to come up. Just google it. Ted Cruz’s name is already being associated with it. Has been for quite some time now. They always tell you who they fear remember? ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:26 PM

I absolutely love Ted Cruz, but right is right….,strong> Cruz is ineligible to run or hold office as President. I would vote for him for any other office that he ran for.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:20 PM

And you’re wrong.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:26 PM

Damn, I’m sick of this stupid birther sh*t.

DRayRaven on August 13, 2013 at 6:27 PM

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:26 PM

indeed :)

cmsinaz on August 13, 2013 at 6:28 PM

Ted Cruz was born a citizen, he didn’t have to do anything to become one. I thought Obama’s birth certificate was fake but I didn’t think it mattered because he was born a citizen and didn’t have to do anything to become one.

Rose on August 13, 2013 at 6:28 PM

forget this mess, let’s pig pile on Obama the rodeo clown, the left is melting down over the insult it gives their messiah

Alinsky was spot on, ridicule does work. Our Precedent is caving to being mocked.

DanMan on August 13, 2013 at 6:28 PM

Ted Crus’s take.

“I can tell you where I was born and who my parents were. And then as a legal matter, others can worry about that. I’m not going to engage,”

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Further proof that he is a very smart guy.

WhatSlushfund on August 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on August 13, 2013 at 6:25 PM

alt, this topic always gets you riled. Show me where the Constitution says Ted Cruz is eligible.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM

Further proof that he is a very smart guy.

WhatSlushfund on August 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM

Agreed. One of the smartest. Its why he has at this point my support.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:30 PM

“We’re gonna have to have some law professors look at it and give us the answer.”

They already have.

He is a natural-born citizen and was NEVER a citizen of Canada, whose ‘anchor baby’ law did not go into effect until 1977.

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:30 PM

Hey, if a Kenyan-born, dope-smoking dog eater can be elected…

RoadRunner on August 13, 2013 at 6:30 PM

Of course Ann would say that… she’s still in love with fat-boy Christy.

Hill60 on August 13, 2013 at 6:04 PM

What does she see in that sweaty hog?

slickwillie2001 on August 13, 2013 at 6:30 PM

Gee, has Ann said this about Zero? We still don’t know for sure where he was born since no one has seem his actual birth certificate.

The one on the white house website being the forgery that it is.
(according to Sherrif Joe’s doc experts)

Of course the lefties made McCain prove his citizenship, but not Zero.

Crus is at least as much a citizen as Zero, more perhaps, since Cruz’s mom was old enough to confer citizenship.

dogsoldier on August 13, 2013 at 6:31 PM

Quick change the constitution, because we know better than the founders!

Lets see, income tax constitutional amendment has had no negative effects.
Lets see, Senators elected by popular vote has had no negative effect.
Forcing the states to allow any tom, dick or mary to vote regardless of anything other than their age, that has had no negative effects either.
Prohibition…

astonerii on August 13, 2013 at 6:31 PM

Further proof that he is a very smart guy.

WhatSlushfund on August 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM

Cruz’s college degrees are earned, not AA like Barry’s.

slickwillie2001 on August 13, 2013 at 6:31 PM

WhatSlushfund on August 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM

You might enjoy this read if you already haven’t ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:32 PM

I absolutely love Ted Cruz, but right is right….,strong> Cruz is ineligible to run or hold office as President. I would vote for him for any other office that he ran for.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:20 PM

This question has been asked and answered before. Cruz is in so go ahead and vote for him if he is seeking the Presidency. You’d be stupid to listen to people like Coulter and decide otherwise because of a bunch of birthers.

But if you really want a loyalty test, why don’t we put Ted in a room and first play O Canada and then the Star Spangled Banner and see which anthem he stands for. Because that makes as much sense as Ann Coulter and the idiots who agree with her.

Happy Nomad on August 13, 2013 at 6:33 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on August 13, 2013 at 6:25 PM

Hate to burst your bubble, but I never bought into that “birter line of crap”. obozo was and is ineligible but not because of his birthplace.

Refer to the 14th Amendment to the Constitution for his ineligibility.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:33 PM

IIRC, Coulter quickly – and vehemently – dismissed the birthers when they complained about Obama, even though the Obama birthers kinda made the same case that being made against Cruz. Ann, make up your mind.

joejm65 on August 13, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:30 PM

RWM, whats your take on the difference in use of the word parent or parents in the arguments that have been made to date?

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:34 PM

pretty sure Coulter wrote off Christie publicly a couple of months ago…she’s had a rough stretch what with Romney and CC, prolly thinking about hooking up with that macho Maher worm again

DanMan on August 13, 2013 at 6:34 PM

(W)hy not pass an amendment to replace it with something like, say, a 25-year residency requirement?

Ahnold became a U.S. citizen in 1983, just sayin’…

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/2004-12-02-schwarzenegger-amendment_x.htm

Fallon on August 13, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Clause 5: Qualifications for office[edit source | editbeta]
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; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

He was born of an American mother , thus a citizen, thus eligible.

Not too difficult.

One plus one for G-d’s sake.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM

Happy Nomad on August 13, 2013 at 6:33 PM

Has nothing to do with loyalty, that isn’t in question. It’s a matter of Law and the U.S. Constitution.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM

“We’re gonna have to have some law professors look at it and give us the answer.”
They already have.
He is a natural-born citizen and was NEVER a citizen of Canada, whose ‘anchor baby’ law did not go into effect until 1977.
Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:30 PM

Resist Me Much,

You seem to suggest you’ve read some literature on this subject. If so can you please pass along a link? I’d be curious to take a look at it.

righty45 on August 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM

It’s a matter of Law and the U.S. Constitution.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM
—–

Learn to read it. Geez the stupidity here is bad enough from our liberal trolls.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:37 PM

The constitution matters to “conservatives”, well, except when it doesn’t.
It is almost like these popular people are picked to specifically undermine the Constitution.

astonerii on August 13, 2013 at 6:38 PM

coulter is very whiny and annoying. no need to take her seriously.

Given the angst and ambiguity over the “natural born” clause in the last two cycles, why not pass an amendment to replace it with something like, say, a 25-year residency requirement?

agreed. i don’t think it’s fair that someone can be excluded from ever being president based on something they couldn’t even control!!

Sachiko on August 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM

If Obama is eligible to be Pres.Then Sen.Cruz is more than eligible.

logman1 on August 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM

If so, that would exclude any person unexpectedly born early to citizens vacationing oversees for two weeks, for missionary families, and for many children of service members.

According to the dimwits this would hold true. Asinine.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM

Ann Coulter left the reservation when she left her Conservative cred in tatters by endorsing the Christ Christie.

Ann, wrong again.

Does she have a new book coming out?

PappyD61 on August 13, 2013 at 6:40 PM

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:37 PM

With respect CW I have been trying to figure this thing out since Team Clinton first dropped it on 0. It is not as straight forward as you suggest. Of course I am not a Constitutional scholar or law expert so my mileage my vary. Lol!

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Learn to read it. Geez the stupidity here is bad enough from our liberal trolls.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:37 PM

‘zactly…..put down the kool aid and read it.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:42 PM

If this gains any traction -doubtful- Obama’s true background will inevitably be unmasked. That will either twist the Constitution further in an attempt to throw a cover over some obvious problems or create the mother of Constitutional train wrecks. Look for “depends upon what the meaning of is, is parsing.”

Mason on August 13, 2013 at 6:42 PM

RWM, whats your take on the difference in use of the word parent or parents in the arguments that have been made to date?

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:34 PM

The term ‘natural born citizen’ is not defined in the Constitution nor has it ever been by the Court as far as ‘two parents and being born on US soil.’

The controlling law on citizenship is 8 USC § 1401. There are two types of citizens:

1. Natural born

2. Naturalised

In the link that I provided above, I go into the births of various well-known officials and explain why they are either natural-born and eligible for the Presidency or are not.

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:42 PM

According to the dimwits this would hold true. Asinine.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM

If you are born on a base, embassy or other place, like John McCain was, you are natural born. Other wise you are just another citizen. Get over it and grow up.

astonerii on August 13, 2013 at 6:43 PM

Reconsidering the “natural born” requirement for POTUS is one thing. But as long as that stands as one of only two constitutional requirements (natural born and at least 35 years old) for the Oval Office…it must be enforced.

JetBoy on August 13, 2013 at 6:45 PM

.

De Oppresso Liber on August 13, 2013 at 6:42 PM

You first. I posted the part that matters .

Clause 5: Qualifications for office
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; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States

Do you know what “or” means” Do you know what a citizen is?

Really this stupidity has to stop.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:45 PM

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:42 PM

Yeah some of that I get. However many of the readings of the natural born clause? seem to use the plural parents. Is that a problem. I understand the issue has never really been decided.

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:45 PM

You seem to suggest you’ve read some literature on this subject. If so can you please pass along a link? I’d be curious to take a look at it.

righty45 on August 13, 2013 at 6:36 PM

I did…above.

Once again…

Just Say ‘No!” To Birtherism Of The Left Variety As Espoused By HAL

Canadian birthright citizenship is covered in Section 3(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, which states that:

3. (1) Subject to this Act, a person is a citizen if

(a) the person was born in Canada after February 14, 1977;

Ted Cruz was born on 22 December 1970. He was not a Canadian citizen at birth. He was an AMERICAN CITIZEN AT BIRTH.

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:46 PM

,

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:46 PM

What about Hillary? I thought you had to be human to run for office. I know she was a Senator, but somehow a cold-blooded reptile seemed an appropriate emissary for NY.

And if you’re the offspring of a U.S. citizen, you’re a natural born citizen. And I’m willing to fight about it.

M240H on August 13, 2013 at 6:46 PM

astonerii on August 13, 2013 at 6:43 PM

Read my last post…you’re just not real bright are you?

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:47 PM

Cruz is eligible as a natural born citizen, this is more settled than climate science, there is an entire department of the US government devoted to saying who is and who ain’t, and, no, I’m not going to give references – again. Look. It. Up.

Knott Buyinit on August 13, 2013 at 6:47 PM

JetBoy on August 13, 2013 at 6:45 PM

Not you too.
*siiigh*

annoyinglittletwerp on August 13, 2013 at 6:47 PM

So then…..being born to one parent regardless of whether just one parent is a citizen and whether or not its the Mother or Father that is the citizen, is the way the requirement reads?

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:50 PM

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:45 PM

No, it’s irrelevant.

The Eligibility Clause:

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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

That’s the ‘Natural-Born Citizenship Clause.’

From the CRS:

The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth”, either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth”. Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. citizen.

As I said, the controlling law on citizenship is:

THE IMMIGRATION AND NATURALISATION ACT OF 1940, 8 USC § 1401 – NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF UNITED STATES AT BIRTH:

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;

(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;

(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;

(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person:

(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or

(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and

(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.

Source: (June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 1, § 301,66 Stat. 235; Pub. L. 89–770, Nov. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 1322; Pub. L. 92–584, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 Stat. 1289; Pub. L. 95–432, §§ 1, 3, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1046; Pub. L. 99–653, § 12,Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3657; Pub. L. 103–416, title I, § 101(a),Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4306.)

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Rightly45- she could send you a link of her Law degree. Lol.

RWM is one smart lass.

wolly4321 on August 13, 2013 at 6:51 PM

A sane and rational person would IGNORE everything said by nutty couter.

Remember, she is the loon who supported rhino RINO christe and who slept with leftist sewer-rat bill maher !

Talk about HORRIBLY BAD JUDGEMENT !!!!!!!!!

TeaPartyNation on August 13, 2013 at 6:53 PM

Canadian Eh:
=============

Is Canadian-Born Ted Cruz Eligible to Run for President?
His mom was American, so that makes him a citizen by birth, he argues.

Updated: May 1, 2013 | 8:08 p.m.
May 1, 2013 | 3:27 p.m.
************************

There is, though, one question that nags at his possible goal of reaching the White House: Does Cruz, who was born in Canada, meet the constitutional muster of being a natural-born citizen? Cruz and a number of legal scholars say yes, but it’s an answer that begs for explanation.

The Constitution has only a few requirements for aspiring executives. Presidents must be at least 35 years old, have lived in the U.S. for 14 years, and be a “natural born Citizen.” Cruz is 42. Check. He’s lived in Texas for more than 14 years. Check. But the definition of what it means to be a natural-born citizen has never been decided in the courts and the Constitution doesn’t explain exactly what it means by “natural born,” according to Peter Spiro, a Temple University law professor and citizenship-law expert.

“These questions get decided in the court of popular opinion,” said Spiro,

who added he thinks Cruz counts as a natural-born citizen.

“Why deprive ourselves of having the opportunity to choose somebody on the basis of that kind of formality?”

Cruz argues he fits the requirement because his mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth. “I’m a citizen by birth,” Cruz said in an interview with Sean Hannity in March.

He was born in Calgary, Alberta, on Dec. 22, 1970, to a Cuban-born father, Rafael, and a Delaware-born mother, Eleanor. Both of his parents were in Canada working in the oil industry. They and Cruz moved to Texas, where his parents went to college, when the future senator was 4 years old. Federal law says that people born outside the U.S. to a parent or parents who are citizens and who have lived in the country are considered citizens at birth.

Some news organizations have taken a whack at answering this question as well. The Texas Tribune, for instance, said confidently in August 2012 that Cruz could be considered a natural-born citizen because his mother was a U.S. citizen. “Bottom line: Despite being born in Canada, Ted Cruz can be considered a natural-born U.S. citizen,” the Tribune wrote.

Harvard legal scholar Alan Dershowitz agreed. “Of course he’s eligible,” he told National Review. “He’s a natural-born, not a naturalized, citizen,” said Eugene Volokh, who’s a friend of Cruz.

Still, his Canadian birth means he’s also technically a Canadian citizen, according to Naomi Alboim, a professor who studies citizenship at Queen’s University in Ontario. But even if Cruz were to openly claim his Canadian citizenship along with his U.S. citizenship,

that wouldn’t legally prevent him

from becoming president. There’s no statutory bar to the presidency for dual citizens.

“Is it a wrinkle?” Spiro asked. “I think the answer is no.”
===========================================================

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/is-canadian-born-ted-cruz-eligible-to-run-for-president-20130501

canopfor on August 13, 2013 at 6:55 PM

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Good deal. I will copy that off and use it as need be. This is going to come up over and over. Mark my words on that. Unless Cruz elects not to run. I will use this as my initial defense against the attacks. Thank you kindly. ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:55 PM

JetBoy on August 13, 2013 at 6:45 PM

Not you too.
*siiigh*

annoyinglittletwerp on August 13, 2013 at 6:47 PM

The law is the law. And in the case of presidential requirements, if Cruz or anyone else doesn’t meet them, they can’t run. If a well-known natural born citizen would be 33 years old when taking the oath, should we simply overlook it…because it’s such a minor thing?

Of course not.

JetBoy on August 13, 2013 at 6:55 PM

You can’t completely ignore the past five years of discussion over Obama’s birth status and just magically declare Cruz eligible. Cruz, if he were going to run, wouldn’t and shouldn’t want a cloud over his candidacy over this issue.

Tater Salad on August 13, 2013 at 6:55 PM

If you are born on a base, embassy or other place, like John McCain was, you are natural born. Other wise you are just another citizen. Get over it and grow up.

astonerii on August 13, 2013 at 6:43 PM

So anyone that was vacationing or traveling in Europe or Mexico or Canada or wherever and went in to labor early and delivered has to break the news to their kid he’s not an American Citizen, eh? Did those kids have to be “naturalized” when they got back from vacation?

Hmmm….

I don’t think so…

Tim Zank on August 13, 2013 at 6:56 PM

With respect CW I have been trying to figure this thing out since Team Clinton first dropped it on 0. It is not as straight forward as you suggest. Of course I am not a Constitutional scholar or law expert so my mileage my vary. Lol!
Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Sad to see you go full-on birther on us. It’s really not that hard to figure out. If you were citizen at birth, you’re eligible. Case closed. Bmore, I don’t know if it’s your well-documented Palin worship and resentfulness of a strong conservative emerging as a serious contender that’s behind your recent birther “concern” posts in this thread and others, but I do know you would do well avoid the nutty birther websites and simply use your common sense.

Next issue.

bluegill on August 13, 2013 at 6:57 PM

Clause 5: Qualifications for office
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; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States

Do you know what “or” means” Do you know what a citizen is?

Really this stupidity has to stop.

CW on August 13, 2013 at 6:45 PM

You do not know how to read do you? It goes onto say, at the time of the adaptation of this Constitution. The Constitution gave those within the borders of the many states at the time of ratification citizenship immediately. Why do you think they parse? Because none of the founders were Natural Born United States of America citizens. Thus, they put the second aspect in to cover until such time as Natural Born would take effect.

You argue others do not read, but then you just take what ever fits your end goal out of context and argue you are superior.

astonerii on August 13, 2013 at 6:58 PM

Christie and Palin fans suddenly very concerned about birther issues after signs of an early Cruz surge in Iowa start to present themselves.

Very interesting.

Coulter, you can take your Christie worship and put it you know where.

bluegill on August 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM

WhatSlushfund on August 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM

You might enjoy this read if you already haven’t ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:32 PM

Not much of a credential when Dershowitz also praises Fauxcahontas. Cruz’ intelligence is self-evident. Can anyone say the same for Warren? The broad is obviously a total moron. Dershowitz is all over the map when it comes to these things. Fifty percent of the time he’s right on target, the other fifty? Total moron. Ultimately, he does more harm than good. I think he does it on purpose.

But this is all beside the point.

WhatSlushfund on August 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM

So anyone that was vacationing or traveling in Europe or Mexico or Canada or wherever and went in to labor early and delivered has to break the news to their kid he’s not an American Citizen, eh? Did those kids have to be “naturalized” when they got back from vacation?

Hmmm….

I don’t think so…

Tim Zank on August 13, 2013 at 6:56 PM

That is how it works out. Like the guy up top said, do not like it, change the Constitution. Because YOU KNOW BETTER THAN the founders. I am sure there will be NO UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES FROM YOUR ARBITRARY SELFISHLY MOTIVATED CHANGES, there never are, ASK THE PROGRESSIVES.

astonerii on August 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Oh and RWM when I use this info, I will make sure to credit you, just as you have always done for me. Lol! ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM

bluegill on August 13, 2013 at 6:57 PM

Leave BMore the hell ALONE, Bluegill!
*Yeah-I’m still a ‘racist’. whatever*
*sneers*

annoyinglittletwerp on August 13, 2013 at 7:01 PM

WhatSlushfund on August 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM

Agreed, not a big fan of Alan either. Lol! ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 7:01 PM

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 6:55 PM

Just save the link to my post. All of the information is in there.

:-)

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 7:01 PM

Oh and RWM when I use this info, I will make sure to credit you, just as you have always done for me. Lol! ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM

lol

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 7:02 PM

Say whatever pleases you about me. I want Ted Cruz as President. The sharp knives will be out. I want to be prepared. I pride my self on being prepared when I have the opportunity. I am not as smart as many of you. Its why I ask the sometimes uncomfortable questions of all of you. ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 7:04 PM

Resist We Much on August 13, 2013 at 7:01 PM

I did and I copied and pasted it out, just in case I can’t get online to look at it. ; ) P.S. I thought the exchange yesterday between you and ITGuy and Basilsbest was a good exchange. Very informative. ; )

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 7:06 PM

Tater Salad on August 13, 2013 at 6:55 PM

Yes, you can, because the Obama birthers were all dead wrong too. Even if Obama was born in Kenya he’d be eligible to be President through his mother.

“Natural Born” has never been defined. It has generally been legally accepted that having an American citizen parent makes one “natural born.” No side is absolutely clear, but those who say you have to “be born on American soil” can point to no basis for their claim. There is no law or accepted legal theory backing that point of view.

eski502 on August 13, 2013 at 7:06 PM

<

a href=”http://thegilledone.blogspot.com/”>bluegill on August 13, 2013 at 6:57 PM

If you were smart and not batshit crazy I might give a rats ass what you thought. Or maybe not. Breadball?

Bmore on August 13, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 8