Cruz family Canada records could be available . . .

[Zippyjuan]

If you are natural born, you aren't going by any statutory law, you are going by natural law.

Is there a book of "natural law"? Kinda like the "law of the jungle"? Or the "law of gravity"? Who enforces "natural law"? Does "natural law" apply to all humans on the planet?

All our laws -including the one saying a president must be "natural born"- are all statutory laws. The Constitution is a statutory law document. Even the idea of citizenship comes from statutory law.

 

[Zippyjuan]

We are going by the US Constitution for the Presidential Eligibility Clause - that is the law . . .
and that law of the land was voted and ratified on by spring of 1789 by all 13 original states.

But ok, Cruz wasn't natural born Citizen meeting that Clause . . . he was naturalized of course by Act of Congress.

So they declared him a citizen after he was born.

 

[Danke]

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/NaturalBorn.php

Ted Cruz is not eligible to be President of the United States; The meaning of "Natural Born."

"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." -- Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, clause 5

Ted Cruz is ineligible to run for President of the United States. He was born in Canada...

...Ted Cruz's supporters try to get around "Natural Born" by claiming it simply means any US citizen, an opinion even echoed at Wikipedia!

But if any US citizen could be President, then the qualifier "Natural Born" would not be needed (and is not present in the Constitutional citizenship requirements for Representatives and Senators). Clearly, to the Founding Fathers, "Natural Born" had a specific and obvious meaning, applied exclusively to the Presidency!

The Founding Fathers did not need to define what "Natural Born" meant inside the Constitution as it had been defined in existing legal theory in works such as "The Law of Nations" by Emerich de Vattel, published in 1758 and relied on heavily by the framers of the Constitution. "Natural Born" was already legally defined when the Constitution was written as "born inside the nation."

Vattel's definition of a natural born citizen: Law of Nations, Book I, Ch. XIX, at § 212:
§ 212: The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

The requirement that parents be citizens also means Marco Rubio is not eligable, because while born in Miami, his parents were both citizens of Cuba, not the United States.

"...I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly that copy, which I kept, (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed,) has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author. Your manuscript "Idee sur le Gouvernement et la Royaute" is also well relished, and may, in time, have its effect. I thank you, likewise, for the other smaller pieces, which accompanied Vattel..." -- Ben Franklin, in a letter to Charles William Fredric Dumas, confirming that Vattel's "Law of Nations" is the legal source used for the Constitution.

The inclusion of the "Natural Born" requirement for the US Presidency was proposed at the Constitutional Convention by Chief Justice John Jay, who wrote, "Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise and 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 devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen..."

The intention is clear that the Presidency not be open to anyone not born within the United States.

In addition, there are no less than four United States Supreme Court Decisions that reaffirm that "Natural Born" means "Born inside the nation."

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

There has never been a United States Supreme Court Decision that ruled "Natural Born" as having any other meaning than "born inside the country."

All of Cruz's supporters, including the corporate media, are demonstrating either an ignorance of the US Constitution, or an utter disregard for it. This tells us that were Cruz to become President, he would continue the long and tragic tradition of recent Presidents to ignore the Constitution to the detriment of the people.

The Constitution is the original contract with America. It is the rules by which We The People allow the government to act as caretaker of our National Sovereignty. If a politician does not wish to work within the restrictions and rules of the Constitution, the honorable thing to do is resign and find useful employment. If Ted Cruz's supporters wish to live in a nation not protected by the Constitution they are free to move elsewhere.

But under the rules this nation operates on, Ted Cruz is not eligible to be President of the United States.

UPDATE: There is now talk of a Rubio/Cruz ticket to defeat Trump, but under the Twelfth Amendment, Cruz may not serve as Vice President either.

 

[Jan2017]

Is there a book of "natural law"? Kinda like the "law of the jungle"? Or the "law of gravity"?

All our laws -including the one saying a president must be "natural born"- are all statutory laws. The Constitution is a statutory law document. Even the idea of citizenship comes from statutory law.

Constitution supesedes statutory law enacted by legislature subsequent to the ratification.
Clearly, case law uses the word "statutory" as not equated with the law of the land in the Constitution - tens of thousands of times but maybe
I'll do a law library quick scan 'fer ya'

 

[Zippyjuan]

Constitution does not define "natural born" so we move to the next step. Statutory law. Statutory law says Cruz was a citizen by birth. The only other way to achieve citizenship mentioned in the Constitution besides "natural born" is via "naturalization"- a legal process to change one's birth citizenship- and it gave Congress the power to decide what that meant and required.

 

[Jan2017]

So they declared him a citizen after he was born.

Only Canada records for Cruz for when he was born and for probably 6 years after . . . alas . . . maybe he should just authorize Ottawa's release of them instead of putting it before an International Court battle for his documents ?

Residence requirement by 1981 seems met . . . and by 18 he may have back-doored one other requirement, although I see one lie either way Cruz decides to play that requirement in court.

 

[Danke]

Constitution supesedes statutory law enacted by legislature subsequent to the ratification.
Clearly, case law uses the word "statutory" as not equated with the law of the land in the Constitution - tens of thousands of times but maybe
I'll do a law library quick scan 'fer ya'

Save a some time: http://www.otto-graph.com/samples/3/sources.html

 

[Jan2017]

Constitution does not define "natural born" . . .

It does - it is the definition that was voted on -
and the courts have already determined that meaning at Supreme Court and District Court levels . . .

Further, statutory means statutory, and a citizen created by statute is not natural born they are naturalized.

 

[Zippyjuan]

It does - it is the definition that was voted on -
and the courts have already determined that meaning at Supreme Court and District Court levels . . .

Further, statutory means statutory, and a citizen created by statute is not natural born they are naturalized.

I see. The Constitution defines Natural Born. I think I missed that. Can you show me where it is defined there?

It is a statute which says people born in the United States are citizens. I guess by your definition, no citizen is truely "natural born". That would mean that nobody is eligible to become president- even Ron Paul. See the 14th Amendment.

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.

That is a statute.

a citizen created by statute is not natural born

Therefore, nobody can be considered "natural born" by you.

 

[Danke]

Constitution does not define "natural born" so we move to the next step. Statutory law. Statutory law says Cruz was a citizen by birth. The only other way to achieve citizenship mentioned in the Constitution besides "natural born" is via "naturalization"- a legal process to change one's birth citizenship- and it gave Congress the power to decide what that meant and required.

We go by how those words were used at the time of writing. Natural Born means born on US land.

 

[Danke]

I see. The Constitution defines Natural Born. I think I missed that. Can you show me where it is defined there?

See: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...be-available&p=6189952&viewfull=1#post6189952

 

[Jan2017]

Statutory law says Cruz was a citizen by birth.

chit out of yer arse again
at birth . . . not BY birth . . . you are so forgetful of your former self/entity still Zippy 2.0?

Yes, once he completed a few statutory naturalization requirements . . .
residence requirement met by 1981, and Cruz would have his chance to explain which angle he wants to take on that other requirement completed presumably in his teenage years.

btw, Dad was still a Canadian citizen then . . . and until 2005. Either way Ted plays it, there seems to be a lie there.
Canada records are just supporting evidence of the derivative - not automatic - citizenship.
Malfeasance by the Mom on the marriage or not . . . creates the ambiguity sufficient to warrant a blood test for proving derivative citizenship now.

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

We go by how those words were used at the time of writing. Natural Born means born on US land.

No, only partly, indians are born on American land too. So where slaves when that had any bearing. It means that the household - ie father, or father and mother later, were citizens too.

It's from natural law - the tribe you are born in, the name you get from your father, the clan from who you were born to, etc. It's part of common law, and was a well defined legal term.

 

[Danke]

No, only partly, indians are born on American land too. So where slaves when that had any bearing. It means that the household - ie father, or father and mother later, were citizens too.

It's from natural law - the tribe you are born in, the name you get from your father, the clan from who you were born to, etc. It's part of common law, and was a well defined legal term.

That was covered in my post. Which nobody seems to read, too long?


Vattel's definition of a natural born citizen: Law of Nations, Book I, Ch. XIX, at § 212:
§ 212: The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Indians were considered "not subject to the jurisdiction" of the US government and excluded. Slaves were property and not "citizens". So he is right, being born in the US did not automatically qualify as "natural born" either. Neither were children of foreigners born on US soil. The Sixteenth Amendment was added (and later updated to allow for Native Americans to be citizens) to recognize people born in the US but not of US parents as being born citizens. It still excludes diplomats and their families as "not subject to the jurisdiction thereof" by international treaty.

The ambiguity of the original Constitution on the question of citizenship has required laws to clarify definitions.

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Even if you weren't naturalized, if your parents were citizens, you are their posterity. That's natural born. So same idea appears at beginning of constitution as well - but it's part of common law, understand to be discovered from natural law.

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

The ambiguity of the original Constitution on the question of citizenship has required laws to clarify definitions.

There's no ambiguity of terms. The constitution is not a dictionary. The term natural born is a well defined legal term from that time period, even if government run high schools have not gone into the subject

 

[Zippyjuan]

There is a lot of ambiguity- even 200 years after the Constitution- or this thread would have a simple, irrefutable answer. There would be no question.

Born outside the US? Not a citizen.

But what about if somebody travels abroad and has a kid while they are there? Is the kid not a US citizen? What if both parents are US citizens and they return to live in the US? What if only parent is a US citizen and the family moves back to the US? What about the child of foreign parents born in the US? Are they citizens?

 

[Jan2017]

That was covered in my post. Which nobody seems to read, too long?


Vattel's definition of a natural born citizen . . .

I would bet . . . that there could still be an old copy owned by John Jay, used at the time of his writing as Secretary of Foreign Affairs if not in the archives of the Supreme Court he served as Chief Justice after the Washington inauguration.

Jay was with Ben Franklin in France before then, so a Franklin copy of Vattel is possible.
Very many references of Madison's use of Vattel

 

[Jan2017]

There is a lot of ambiguity- even 200 years after the Constitution- or this thread would have a simple, irrefutable answer. There would be no question.

Ted Cruz naturalized by statute - was not a natural born Citizen by the well-established definition used in the Constitution.

Canada records for the Cruz family from 1967 - 1975, and for Ted in 2014 need to be certified from Canada or not . . .
that is the only question of this thread.

Ted Cruz will not be able to stay seated in the US Senate as he is only a very recent expatriate of Canada, eligibility in 2023 -
established for U.S. jurisdiction once Canada or an International court allows the release not authorized by the expatriate born in Alberta in late 1970.

Ted Cruz and mother would need a blood test to affirm a very defective Canada birth certificate - by USA INS law -
whenever there is a reasonable question for derivative citizenship through one parent.

Ted Cruz' mother also committed perhaps malfeasance in the previous pregnancy before Ted and before her husband Rafael -
but after her previous husband Wilson now in London - although it seems to have been with his consent at least.
I haven't seen that birth certificate, but it goes to lack of character toward a supoena for INS mandated blood tests now.