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.
Cruz was a citizen AT BIRTH. He does not need to prove anything.
That's what I thought until I learned there is a difference between a citizen and natural born citizen. You can be made a citizen by law, executive action or what not. It is a bureaucratic action. You can go back and recreate natural born. You have to have been born on American soil. You can't change that by paper work. The country that issues your birth certificate can forever have claim of dominion over you. It doesn't matter if YOU renounce it or not.
The real question is whether SCOTUS would involve themselves in this. It seems like a kind of political questions that SCOTUS has traditionally shied away from. But someone has to have the final word, and no one else can make the pronouncement so...
Mick
There is absolutely no way that SCOTUS would take up this issue for the very reason you stated. It is too political in nature.
I'm not a constitutional scholar, and neither are the rest of you. So I'm not going to say I know what the answer is...and neither should any of you. Some of you state your opinions as facts; you ought to get over that.
I can't stand Ted Cruz. To me, he is slimy. I almost gag when I see him. But my personal opinion is that he is legally qualified to be president (darn it).
I listened to a rather long discussion about this on POTUS radio the other day. I have no idea how accurate the statements being made were, but the discussion was among lawyers, and as I recall constitutional lawyers. They were in disagreement. The crux of the problem -- as they saw it -- was that the term "natural born citizen" is not actually defined in the Constitution. My impression was they felt that Cruz was qualified, but that they also felt that the issue was not "settled".
The issue with Obama is that if he was legally adopted by his stepfather Sotero in Indonesia, he is no longer a US citizen.
I disagree..even if adopted by the stepfather, he would always be the son (through his mother) of a citizen, and was birn in the states.. an adoption does not renig or invalidate the citizenship of him or his mother....... the ONLY way it would be is if he GAVE UP HIS CITIZENSHIP to become a citizen of Indoneasia
Our Founding Fathers didn't want people being President with foreign biases. Rafa's father was loyal to Fidel Castro, which should be a concern for any freedom-loving American.
Ya know, I went strolling through the highly amusing thread two years ago about my "un-citizenship" per Miss Informed, and came across this chestnut:
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Once again , the State Dept DOES in fact have the authority to determine citizenship.
So......if Ted Cruz can produce a U.S. passport, then he must be a U.S. citizen.
And apparently, since both Dad and I can each produce a U.S. passport, then both of us must be U.S. citizens, even though grandma was an illegal immigrant.
"Loss of U.S. Nationality Loss of nationality, also known as expatriation, means the loss of citizenship status properly acquired, whether by birth in the United States, through birth abroad to U.S. citizen parents, or by naturalization. As a result of several constitutional decisions, §349(a) of the current Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") provides that U.S. nationality is lost only when the U.S. citizen does one of the specified acts described in INA §349, voluntarily and with the intent to give up that nationality. If any one of these requirements is lacking, nationality is not lost.
Acts not specified in INA §349 do not result in expatriation. For example, acquisition of foreign nationality at birth will not result in expatriation. However, two expatriating acts contained in INA §349 are relevant to the issue of dual nationality. They are:
obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon the citizen's own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; and
taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof after having attained the age of eighteen years."
As a minor, Obama's adoption would not have been voluntary, and he was not of the legal age required to show intent to give up his U.S. citizenship.
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.
, the State Dept DOES in fact have the authority to determine citizenship.
