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.
Because, if you were smart enough to pick up on it, any answer to that question doesn't matter. "Feelings" don't overrule centuries old well-established international LAW.
That's why the US State Department issues this warning, to this day:
Quote:
"Each country has its own nationality laws based on its own policy. Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice.
"...The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. nationals may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist nationals abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance.
However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries.Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there."
Because, if you were smart enough to pick up on it, any answer to that question doesn't matter. "Feelings" don't overrule centuries old well-established international LAW.
That's why the US State Department issues this warning, to this day: Dual Nationality
FACTS, people... not "feelings."
So your answer is yes, the possibility exists that a President Ted Cruz is subject to Canadian or Cuban law and thus, we can't have Raoul Castro in charge at the White House?
So your answer is yes, the possibility exists that a President Ted Cruz is subject to Canadian or Cuban law and thus, we can't have Ted Cruz in charge at the White House?
It's not just a "possibility." It's a matter of centuries old well-established international law. The US State Department STILL warns about it to this day. I posted the link.
Obama is ineligible, as well, having admittedly been born British (via his Father).
By the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1956, both Ted Cruz and Barack Obama are considered to be citizens of the United States at birth.
Yet you feel that they shouldn't be eligible for the Presidency because of the phrase 'natural born citizen', which you infer from a letter by John Jay to mean 'no foreigners allowed'.
Quite a step for you, moving away from a literal interpretation of the Constitution.
By the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1956, both Ted Cruz and Barack Obama are considered to be citizens of the United States at birth.
OK, but the Constitution requires NBC status for POTUS eligibility.
Both Cruz and Obama are eligible for Congress, though. That requires only citizenship.
Quote:
Yet you feel that they shouldn't be eligible for the Presidency because of the phrase 'natural born citizen', which you infer from a letter by John Jay to mean 'no foreigners allowed'.
That was stated, explicitly, when Jay suggested it and Washington accepted the suggestion, and subsequently thanked Jay for it. It was then inserted into the Constitution, adopted, and ratified.
History matters.
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.
