Coulter: Cruz is Not a Natural Born Citizen

[Zippyjuan]

So Arnold Schwarzenegger could never be POTUS?

Not eligible. He was not a citizen at birth.

 

[RonPaulMall]

Did McCain ever have dual citizenship? I think that's the key and evidently Rafael does too; which is why he went out of his way to give up his Canadian citizenship shortly before his run.

Dual citizenship can't be relevant because the granting of citizenship is a unilateral act. Cuba could declare Trump a Cuban citizen tomorrow if they wanted and there is nothing Trump could do about it. Cruz never asked to be an American. His family eventually moved here so it worked out for him but if they had stayed in Canada he would have had an unwanted US Citizenship hanging around his neck the same way London Mayor Boris Johnson does.

Whether Panama conferred citizenship on McCain (and I doubt they did because few nations have as idiotic nationality laws as the US does) is irrelevant. The relevant point is that the US Government did not confer citizenship on him till he was nearly one year old. All the previous examples of controversy at least involved people that were born Americans, but McCain didn't even have that. He was neither natural born nor born American.

 

[dusman]

You're mixing up two different things, the definition of the phrase natural born citizen, and the legal prerequisites for counting as one.

The phrase natural born citizen simply refers to anyone and everyone who is been a citizen by birth. That is what it has always meant, including when the Constitution was written and ratified. That meaning has not changed.

The legal prerequisites for being a citizen by birth can change and have changed, according to legislation.

The original intent of the Constitution applies to what the phrase natural born citizen means. But it doesn't preclude the federal government from changing laws that determine who is and isn't one.

I disagree. I actually would have agreed with you when I first started researching it as I intended to prove others wrong on what natural born citizen meant during Obama's run because I thought it was sort of a dumb position and waste of time. One, I couldn't actually ever prove that natural born citizen ever meant what you are saying it did. Second, digging further only moved me away more and more from that assumption.

The very existence of the definition by Vattel disproves the basis of your conclusion, which is that it always meant citizen by birth, including when the Constitution was written. It's very clear that Vattel gave it a substantially more restrictive meaning and we know also that the founders were not only aware of Law of Nations, but as I pointed out, requesting copies when the conventions were taking place! Its very likely that it held common meaning in the time frame it was written in Law of Nations and included in the Constitution which has essentially been lost due to the fact it wasn't really a substantial issue that affected many.

I'd suggest that it is necessary for natural-born citizen to mean a child born to two citizens, so that it may precede legislation and might not be altered by it without amendment. There's lots of interesting proof, such as former naturalization acts and original drafts of the 14th Amendment that both at one point held variations of Vattel's language.

 

[erowe1]

One, I couldn't actually ever prove that natural born citizen ever meant what you are saying it did.

If you had looked up the phrase natural born in the Oxford English Dictionary, you would have seen the proof you lacked.

 

[erowe1]

Whether Panama conferred citizenship on McCain (and I doubt they did because few nations have as idiotic nationality laws as the US does) is irrelevant.

I agree with you that it's irrelevant.

But McCain wasn't born in the Republic of Panama anyway, but rather in the Panama Canal Zone, which was a US territory at the time.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

If you had looked up the phrase natural born in the Oxford English Dictionary, you would have seen the proof you lacked.

Not in 1792...

 

[erowe1]

Not in 1798...

The OED has plenty of examples of the phrase natural born from before the late 18th century. It had a well-established meaning at that time.

 

[TheNewYorker]

 

[The Gold Standard]

I don't know why people think it matters. Even if the Constitution explicity forbade him for ever being president, they can do whatever they want. They don't give a fuck about the Constitution. The guy is married to Goldman Sachs. He is ready to disembowel every Muslim on Earth. That makes him qualified and eligible.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

The OED has plenty of examples of the phrase natural born from before the late 18th century. It had a well-established meaning at that time.

If you want to say [whatever] is the meaning the Framers used, then you have to cite a source contemporary to its drafting. Frankly I don't even know which definition you are promoting since I haven't read it, so I don't have that axe to grind, I'm just promoting the proper procedure for original intent.

 

[Jan2017]

If you want to say [whatever] is the meaning the Framers used, then you have to cite a source contemporary to its drafting. Frankly I don't even know which definition you are promoting since I haven't read it, so I don't have that axe to grind, I'm just promoting the proper procedure for original intent.

John Jay's phrase that was used verbatim for the state delegations to vote on - a no-brainer really.
(letter to Washington, July 1787)(Madison notes of vote, August 1787)

 

[GunnyFreedom]

John Jay's phrase that was used verbatim for the state delegations to vote on - a no-brainer really.
(letter to Washington, July 1787)(Madison notes of vote, August 1787)

Yeah, sorry, English is my first language. I'm not gonna fall for it.

 

[Valli6]

So Arnold Schwarzenegger could never be POTUS?

I remember when there was some talk about changing the rules so he could run.

 

[Jan2017]

Yeah, sorry, English is my first language. I'm not gonna fall for it.

Whaddya' mean ?
Both sources were in colonial English and some of those weird colonial characters/typography, though very readable.
Maybe try the stacks in the basement of a university library if ya' need to find the historical readings, in plain enough English.

Madison notes are the best accounts of the what the proceedings and votes were at that constitutional convention -
there was no official secretary transcribing every detail.

Madison's account of the President Eligibility Clause vote was like only a couple lines of entry -
- it was about the day - or very day (?) that Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts argued for letters of marque and the War Powers Clause discussions.

 

[erowe1]

If you want to say [whatever] is the meaning the Framers used, then you have to cite a source contemporary to its drafting. Frankly I don't even know which definition you are promoting since I haven't read it, so I don't have that axe to grind, I'm just promoting the proper procedure for original intent.

They list numerous examples from the 1500's to the 2000's, all with the same meaning, including an example from Thomas Jefferson in 1776. The dictionary you linked doesn't help only because it doesn't have any listing at all for the phrase.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

They list numerous examples from the 1500's to the 2000's, all with the same meaning, including an example from Thomas Jefferson in 1776. The dictionary you linked doesn't help only because it doesn't have any listing at all for the phrase.

Like I said, I don't even know what definition you are proposing, so I can't even have a dog in that fight. If there are all of these definitions floating around from the 1700's then post one. Preferably a proper scan like mine, but something verifiable in any case.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

I think the bottom line is, despite all the squabble in this thread, it really doesn't matter.

This country stopped following the constitution long ago. It really doesn't matter who is ineligible, they will still get in with no opposition.

Thread winnar! +rep

 

[Peace&Freedom]

I don't know why people think it matters. Even if the Constitution explicity forbade him for ever being president, they can do whatever they want. They don't give a fuck about the Constitution. The guy is married to Goldman Sachs. He is ready to disembowel every Muslim on Earth. That makes him qualified and eligible.

In the eyes of many statists, yes, that's all that matters. They will always seek to circumvent or ignore the known limits set by a Constitution, scorn it as "just a piece of paper," and replace it with some pro-tyranny substitute that gives them legal cover and does not inconvenience them.

But the real point of a Constitution, a Magna Carta, an international convention, etc is for the people to historically establish, in writing, recognition of what rule of law/limited government criteria should be, to provide a counterweight to reverse, stop, limit or greatly slow down any new move towards tyranny. With the genie of the basis of liberty, rights, and limits to government power being acknowledged, or out of the bottle, there is at least a level battle field and historic legal framework upon which to fight to retain freedom.

What's been delicious about the new birther redux is watching the anguish of the MSM and establishment, in finding out for the umpteenth time that they can't squash the issue. Too many people remember the importance of original intent, and that a Constitutional provision can't be replaced, shoved aside, or "disappeared" based on passing a statute. They can't even blame the flap on R & R (Republicans and Racism) anymore, since the questions have grown beyond the case of CIA Obarry, and it's been admitted Hillary floated the birther issue in 2008. The major media increasingly can't control the narrative of the campaign coverage anymore, on this and other fronts, and that's a very encouraging trend.

 

[idiom]

I do enjoy that its pretty much only GOP candidates getting tarred by the birtherism brush now.

Shit is coming home to roost and its hilarious.

If it takes Cruz down it will tear Rubio a new one too.

 

[Jan2017]

John Jay's phrase that was used verbatim for the state delegations to vote on - a no-brainer really.
(letter to Washington, July 1787)(Madison notes of vote, August 1787)

Yeah, sorry, English is my first language. I'm not gonna fall for it.

"Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide 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 devolved on, any but a natural born Citizen."