ADVERTISEMENT

Birtherism is back!

Merge

All World
Nov 5, 2001
19,575
5,237
113
Thanks to Trump we get to talk about Birtherism again.

Any thoughts on Cruz? - This should be fun at the debate!

The Naturalization act of 1795 removed the term natural born from the naturalization act of 1790 and changed it to citizen. So was Cruz a citizen by birth?

I'm going back and forth on this.

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

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
Nope

(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: -
Nope

(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
Nope

(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
Nope

(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
Nope

(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
Nope

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying 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 five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:
Provided:
That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date;

Re-reading that, his mother would only have to be living in the US for 5 years at some point. Is that correct? Maybe

(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
Nope
 
Last edited:
Seems like he fits section (g). His mother lived a long time in America, attended Rice University, etc.
 
To me this whole born in the USA thing is nonsense whether it's Cruz, Obama or McCain. It should never have been in the Constitution. And quite honestly being born here should not automatically make you a citizen either. The place of birth requirement just makes no sense either for holding office or citizenship.

Tom K
 
It is good selling to make the other guy spend time explaining stuff that even if explained satisfactorily, does not get the sale. And saying stuff that may make the other guy lose control a little isn't a bad idea either. He may say something dumb.

As I have said before, libs say we have to go by the letter of the law with this (even though the 14th was designed for slaves at a time when no immigration laws existed), just like conservs abuse the wording of the 2nd amendment. No child of an illegal immigrant should be a citizen. I don't know why this is hard to fathom, and as most know, I am of the liberal persuasion.

I saw no reason why Arnold could not run for pres, but he cant.
 
The birthed issue has always been nonsense. Cruz is a citizen and is eligible to run for President. These are very easy conditions to fill if one parent is a citizen. Which of course marks the idiocy of Trump.

However, the bigger issue with Cruz is a guy who kept his Canadian citizenship up until 2 years ago. It is baffling how Republicans would not have an issue with that.
 
My wife and kids are Irish citizens via my mom in law being born there. What is the harm in duel citizenship.
 
To me this whole born in the USA thing is nonsense whether it's Cruz, Obama or McCain. It should never have been in the Constitution. And quite honestly being born here should not automatically make you a citizen either. The place of birth requirement just makes no sense either for holding office or citizenship.

Tom K
Bingo! This running across the border to give birth and get hand outs has got to stop.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT