Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Could Congress have cleared this up years ago/decades ago simply by writing a law that defines natural born citizen better? After McCain lost should he have gone back to the Senate and written that bill?
The NBC requirement is in Article II of the Constitution, so any clarification would need to be done by a Constitutional amendment to be truly dispositive. Congress cannot change (including the interpretation thereof) the Constitution by statute. A contemporary statute would not override the common law and legislative intent back when the Constitution was adopted. Think about it, can Congress willy nilly change the scope of the First Amendment by passing legislation with its interpretation of words in there? Second Amendment?
Based on what? The records only indicate it wasn't submitted to the Convention for adoption. We already know that. The Committee of Eleven changed the requirement from "born a citizen" to "natural born citizen" before submitting it to the Convention for adoption.
Great Caesar's ghost, woman!
Your own cited source undeniably states that not only wasn't it submitted to the Committee of Eleven, Hamilton's document wasn't even authored until after the Committee presented its first draft.
An image of George Washington's own copy (with his own hand writing upon it) clearly shows that the first draft presented by the Committee of Eleven never included any requirement of citizenship.
You belittled others in the thread for not knowing history, now you want to inject an unsupported assumption into the historical record?
My brother was born in Bogota, Columbia but since his birth it was always a known fact that he had dual citizenship (both my parents are US citizens). How could Cruz not know that he had dual citizenship until 2014?
Because his family moved back to the US when he was 3 and neither of his parents knew or understood that CA citizenship was conferred upon him at birth, Apparently, throughout Cruz' childhood, school career and his adult life, the issue was never raised, so he had no reason to investigate the issue.
Note - no citizenship requirement for the office. The John Jay letter didn't change 'born a citizen' to 'natural born citizen'.
It somehow made it into the Constitution that was eventually adopted and ratified. Furthermore, there's a documented record of Jay's letter to Washington, and Washington's subsequent letter to Jay thanking him for his hint:
Quote:
July 25, 1787
Dear Sir
...Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen
Dear Sir,
...I thank you for the hints contained in your letter, and with best wishes for Mrs. Jay, and great Affection for yourself I am Dear Sir your most obedient servant.
The intent of the "natural born citizen" requirement suggested by Jay was specifically to exclude those born foreign citizens/subjects from eligibility for President.
Miss Informed, please stop changing the historical record in an attempt to try to shore up you position.
You keep removing the emphasis that John Jay explicitly placed in his letter.
Quote:
Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen
It is clear from his emphasis that John Jay is talking about a person who is born a citizen of the United States.
i think i asked you this question before ( and apologies for forgetting if i did ) but would you accept the verdict if the SCOTUS rules that NBC = citizen at birth?
If it were based on legitimate historical documented evidence, yes. However, after researching this at length, including the letters between John Jay and George Washington, there simply is no evidence to support that conclusion.
Your own cited source undeniably states that not only wasn't it submitted to the Committee of Eleven
No, it did not state that. It only stated that it wasn't submitted to the Convention. That's true. The version submitted to the Convention was the "natural born citizen" requirement.
An image of George Washington's own copy (with his own hand writing upon it) clearly shows that the first draft presented by the Committee of Eleven never included any requirement of citizenship.
If you believe so, explain how it was included in the version that was presented, adopted, and ratified.
Of course, to do so, you'd have to admit that the source was John Jay who intended "natural born citizen" to exclude anyone born a foreign citizen/subject from eligibility for President.
Because his family moved back to the US when he was 3 and neither of his parents knew or understood that CA citizenship was conferred upon him at birth, Apparently, throughout Cruz' childhood, school career and his adult life, the issue was never raised, so he had no reason to investigate the issue.
How could he have not known he was born in Canada? There are several times one must present their birth certificate for various purposes. His was issued in Canada.
It doesn't matter if it was removed. What matters is that the 1790 Act existed, it was written, it was passed by Congress, and how it was written, what words were used, who it was written by, completely refute your arguments about the intent and feelings of the Founding Fathers.
EXACTLY. To rule on this case, a court would have to define "natural born citizen" and to do so, they would have to look back to the 1790 Naturalization Act since it is the ONLY place where the Founders defined that term. Regardless of its subsequent "repeal" , the fact remains that the court MUST look to the definition of Natural Born Citizen contained in the 1790 Act to understand the intent of the Naturalization Act and to determine whether Cruz meets that definition. WHICH HE DOES.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
