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.
Based on the Legislative History of Naturalization. It seems clear enough that the language of the 1790 Act was exactly what was intended and that as the Act was "amended" and ultimately replaced by later acts, the issue (at least in the minds of the legislators) was settled.
It's not settled. The "natural born" was removed in the 1795 ACT, never to be seen again to this day.
Yes, this is what some legal scholars say that 'natural-born' derived from English common law and meant born with the country, and I don't have a problem with that. What irks me is the birthright citizenship for illegals children.
That's political "policy," not law. Look at the US v. Wong Kim Ark ruling, issued by SCOTUS long after the 14th Amendment. One of the indicators on which WKA was ruled a citizen was because he was born in the US to parents who were legally permanently domiciled in the US. Illegal aliens aren't in the US legally, nor are they permanently domiciled here. Their children shouldn't be US citizens at birth.
I think since Trumps mother was born a British subject he shouldn't be eligible either.
You've already been told you're wrong about that. According to British Nationality Law at the time Trump was born, British citizenship could only descend to a child born outside the UK via a British FATHER. British mothers were only added to that and applied to children born in 1983 or later.
Please don't be ignorant. At least make an attempt to LEARN about that of which you attempt to speak.
'Some' scholars believe a lot of things.
Some believe George Romney wasn't eligible because he was born in Mexico to two US citizens.
Some believe Mitt Romney wasn't eligible because his father was born in Mexico to two US citizens.
Some believe Barry Goldwater wasn't eligible because Arizona was still a territory when he was born.
Some believe John McCain wasn't eligible because he was born in Panama,to a US Admiral in a US military hospital.
Some believe Barak Obama wasn't eligible because he 'really wasn't born in Hawaii' or because his father was born a british subject as Kenya was a British colony at the time.
Some believe Marco Rubio isn't eligible because his parents weren't citizens yet when he was born in Florida.
They all ran or are running anyway.
Some scholars believe that only those who meet the 'original' conditions and circumstances and customs relevant to 1790 are eligible,therefore Hillary Clinton and Ben Carson are clearly not eligible since there is no way a woman or a black man could have run in 1790.
I think since Trumps mother was born a British subject he shouldn't be eligible either.....well I don't really think that but i'm OK with all the others running too.
Some scholars believe Jeb Bush and the rest of his family,along with many other powerful people aren't human but rather alien/reptilian/human hybrids.....I don't believe it but if proven Jeb Bush likely doesn't qualify either.
You are free to cite Federal Law defining NBC. Please do.
Know what's really cool about the Interwebz? Eventually, some one else finds the answer to the question and posts it for everyone to read. Why Ted Cruz is Eligible to be President
Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952, Title III - Nationality and Naturalization, Chapter 1 - Nationality at Birth and by Collective Naturalization, Section 301(a) (Link to PDF):
Quote:
Section 301(a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
...
(7) A person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its 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 ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years; Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.
Ted Cruz's mother, Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson, was born on November 23, 1934 in Delaware and earned an undergraduate degree from Rice University in the 1950's; this meets both the qualifications for U.S. citizenship and for physical presence within the United States for the parent of a child born outside of the U.S. By federal law, Ted Cruz is a citizen of the United States at birth.
The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 was never repealed, was in effect in 1970, and still remains in full effect to this day.
Now, to be fair, InformedConsent did require 'natural born citizenship', which the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 doesn't define. But then there is no Constitutional article or amendment, no statutory law or case law currently in effect that explicitly defines natural born citizenship.
If there's no such explicitly defined current legal definition, then the case could be made that Ted Cruz isn't a natural born citizen. But the same logic could be used to make the case that Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton or InformedConsent aren't natural born citizens either.
For that matter - nobody has ever been a natural born citizen, therefore, anyone born after 1790 who later became President failed to meet the requirement for 'natural born citizen'.
Yes, this is what some legal scholars say that 'natural-born' derived from English common law and meant born with the country, and I don't have a problem with that. What irks me is the birthright citizenship for illegals children. Two natural-born citizens could have a child while working in say Canada or perhaps while stationed over seas in the military (?), and the child is ineligible to be President. An illegal Hispanic can sneak across the border and give birth and that child is conceivably eligible.
"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.”
That's weird, considering that the Naturalization Act of 1790 (oooh, when the Founding Fathers would have been the ones writing the laws) expressly stated that children born abroad to American fathers were NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.
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.
Naturalization Act of 1790. The Founding Fathers wrote the law, which said that children born abroad of American fathers were NATURAL-BORN CITIZENS of the United States.
Know what's really cool about the Interwebz? Eventually, some one else finds the answer to the question and posts it for everyone to read. Why Ted Cruz is Eligible to be President
Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952, Title III - Nationality and Naturalization, Chapter 1 - Nationality at Birth and by Collective Naturalization, Section 301(a) (Link to PDF):
Quote:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
...
(7) A person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its 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 ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years; Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.
STILL not seeing natural born citizen in there.
The FACT of the matter is that "natural born" was removed in the 1795 Naturalization Act, never to be seen again to this day.
A 2004 attempt (S. 2128) to reinstate it FAILED.
Cruz is ineligible.
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.
Ted Cruz "not eligible" according to some scholars
