L.A. Times Goes Birther On Ted Cruz ( Ignores Obama's Eligibility Problem)

All that matters is... What was the definition of “natural born” when the phrase was used in the Constitution. Case law is meaningless here. We are NOT interpreting here, we are simply defining words. Natural born is born in the country to two parents whom are citizens. Anything else requires statute to clarify, and is therefore NOT natural born. Ted Cruz is ineligible to be president.




http://www.latimes.com/changebrowser#url=/#section/-1/article/p2p-82907128/

 

what was Obama's problem....he was born in the United States.....that is a fact.

Your definition of natural born citizen is not true.

 

The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office found Obama's birth certificate to be a 100% forgery after a very thorough investigation. That casts extreme doubt as to where Obama was born. And my definition of a natural born Citizen is correct.

 

Cruz is a natural born US citizen.. Sounds like the LA times is making fun of the idiot birthers.. but rest assured there are enough stupid Americans who will challenge the Natural born citizenship of Jindal and Rubio.

 

I agree to a point.

If the parents are guests, working in the country legally, any child born in that time frame should not "automatically" be given citizenship, but citizenship should 'automatically revert to the parents home of origin.

If the parents are illegally in the country, they are criminals, and any children born while involved in criminal activity (criminal trespassing in this case) should never be given "automatic" citizenship, but citizenship should 'automatically' revert to the parents home of origin.

These word games, intellectual dishonesty and the blatant misinterpretation of the constitution from its original intent needs to be stopped immediately.

 

"The consensus [among constitutional lawyers] is that it means citizens at birth," said Gabriel Chin, a professor at UC Davis. "But people are not 1000% confident."

Gabriel Chin is a little liberal Marxist who is known to slobber all over our Muslim non-natural born Citizen pResident.

He had the audacity to claim that President Barack Obama is a natural born citizen, given that Obama was a citizen "by birth" under the Fourteenth Amendment :

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.(*)

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

But there is NO mention of the term "natural born citizen" nor is Article 2 Section I even referenced!

Pure brazen liberal arrogance.

 

The la times didn't exactly go birther

"At this point I should confess a personal stake: My oldest daughter was born in Toronto. Like Ted Cruz, she inherited U.S. citizenship through one of her parents. But we assured her that she could grow up to be president of the United States. "
I don't think there's an issue but it's not a new question being asked.

 

So if your eligibility hinges on your parents citizenship then I guess nobody adopted can be president....nobody who can't prove their parents citizenship at their time of birth.

It's a really stupid interpretation birthers are proposing

 

Ted Cruz is, sadly, eligible to run for president.

 

It's the law, not sure why you have an issue understanding this. It's really unambiguous. As it relates to jus soli. 14th Amendment to the Constitution (186. Section 1 of this amendment declares that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

"Naturalization" The U.S. Constitution Article I, section 8, clause 4 gives Congress the power to make naturalization laws for the United States. As this relates to jus sanguinis (the principle of nationality law by which citizenship is not determined by place of birth but by having one or both parents who are citizens of the state):

For persons born between December 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986, a person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true:

The person's parents were married at the time of birth
One of the person's parents was a U.S. citizen when the person was born
The citizen parent lived at least ten years in the United States before the child's birth;
A minimum of 5 of these 10 years in the United States were after the citizen parent's 14th birthday.

Cheers
Labour

 

So the adopted who don't know their birth parents are ineligible? Has any candidate ever been forced to prove their parents citizenship before running?

 

A Canadian born President is a risk to National Security.

Why not a Russian born?



Moi

r > g
Imagine: Fifty states under
Ottawa interests!

​

 

Doesn't matter whether you agree or not.. read the statutes.. Its time.. Its ben six years.

- - - Updated - - -

You're wrong... Read the statutes and link up your bogus claims to a source.

 

Yes, wasn't McCain foreign born? Someone had to attest that he was the child of a Citizen or that he was born on U.S. soil abroad? Coco Solo Naval Air Station Hospital in the Canal Zone.

Have there been others? I don't know.

Mello I don't have a problem with the Presidential qualifications as written in the Constitution. "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."

If someone in the future wishes to run for the office who was foreign born then I think it right and proper to insure he / she meets the Constitutional qualifications. Don't you?

As to Obama, he dropped out of his mother's womb and smashed his head into lava rock on the Island of Oahu in the State of Hawaii; citizen by birth.

Cheers
Labour

 

What statutes? The misinterpretations of the constitution, which allows corrupt politicians to play word games and rule under intellectually dishonest irrational? No thanks I would rather be logical, and consistent.

 

What? Where am I wrong? And why on earth would you have an attitude with my dispassionate post. I quote the Constitution and U.S. Code from the dates noted.

Be specific please.

Cheers
Labour

 

McCain's parents were legally in a foreign country on a US military instillation, he is a legal citizen of the USA, just like any other foreign dignitary's children born on US soil would not have US citizenship.

If Obama was born in a territory that became a state (Hawaii for example) there is no doubt he is a legal citizen as well.

These idiot lawyers who read basic English and interpret gibberish is the problem here.

 

Wasn't McCain born off base in Panama territory?

 

Oh............ You have no education, do you? I am truly disappointed.

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps. The Constitution authorizes the Congress to do create clarifying legislation in Section 5 of the 14th Amendment; the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4, also allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization, which includes citizenship.



Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
•Anyone born inside the United States *
•Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
•Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
•Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
•Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
•A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

* There is an exception in the law — the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401

- - - Updated - - -

THAT'S CORRECT AND McCain IS A NATURAL BORN us CITIZEN. Being born on base has NOTHING to do with it.. LOLOL

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401

 

Sorry but that defines a U.S. Citizen by statute. Nowhere in the code can the term 'natural born Citizen'(strictly for the president) be found from Article 2 Section 1 of the Constitution. McCain was never qualified to meet Article 2 Section 1. He was born outside the jurisdiction of the United States like Ted Cruz, a statutory citizen. A statutory citizen (bestowed by man's pen) cannot be made into a natural born Citizen (bestowed by God,nature).

 

I always thought he was born on a Navy instillation in the canal zone, but you may be right, he might have been born at a local facility.

I guess if you just want to be obstructive and intellectually dishonest about the intent of the law, there is some doubt that could be irrationally formed.

 

It doesn't matter if McCain's parent were in the military or if he was born on base... Read the statutes.

 

Natural born has never once meant you had to have 2 citizen parents. If you bothered to read the wong Kim ark decision you would have seen they cited British common law on natural born subject.

Lol, birthers.

 

Actually I am fully aware of how the original intent of the 14th amendment has been completely prostituted out to mean something that it was never intended to mean. Here is the actual intent;

So what was to be the premise behind America’s first and only constitutional birthright declaration in the year 1866? Simply all children born to parents who owed no foreign allegiance were to be citizens of the United States – that is to say – not only must a child be born but born within the complete allegiance of the United States politically and not merely within its limits. That is what; "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means.

The reinterpretation is wrong, and the consequences of the misinterpretation is evident in the current invasion of illegal trespassers.

 

Yes that is why the status of John McCain is considered still to this day in dispute, and that the matter was never addressed, therefor went unchallenged according to constitutional lawyers and the courts. IOW since nobody could show injury to him being allowed to run, no individual could bring it to the court's for consideration. They tried and the case was dismissed. The entire procedure for challenging the naturalism of a political candidate, has been declared as much as a gray area as the anchor baby clause. The reality is neither are gray areas when you actually look at the original intent of the 14th amendment. It only becomes gray when intellectual dishonesty is introduced into the discussion.