Re: [912PGHSouthHills] Ted Cruz eligibility

From: linda b.
Sent on: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:31 PM
Thanks, Judy. 
Linda

On Sep 24, 2013, at 1:11 PM, "Judith S. Brown" <[address removed]> wrote:

Below and attached is all you need to know about Natural Born Citizen and what congress could use to impeach Obama if they chose to do it.
 
 

From the constitution  Article II; Section 1, 5th paragraph – “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. “

 

“or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this constitution,” This statement was put in because until the constitution was signed no one was a citizen and many who were living in the new country were born elsewhere.  They all became citizens at the signing of the constitution.

 

It’s simple A Natural Born Citizen is born on American soil which includes Embassies, military bases, and territories AND both parents are citizens at the time of birth

 

None of these individuals are eligible to be president or vice-president

Cruz was born in Canada to a citizen mother but his father never became a citizen until 2005.

Rubio while born on American soil his parents never became citizens until 5 years after his birth

Obama, if we accept his forged birth certificate, was born on American soil to a citizen mother but his father never became a citizen.

 

Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen and that the child's natural born citizenship is not lost if the child is taken to and raised in the country of the parents' origin, provided that upon attaining the age of majority, the child elects to retain U.S. citizenship "and to return to the United States to assume its duties."

Minor v Happersett

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that, At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their

 

That the “natural born Citizen” clause is based on undivided allegiance and loyalty can be seen from how the Founders distinguished between "citizen" and "natural born Citizen." This distinction is based on the law of nations which became part of our national common law. According to that law as explained by E. Vattel in, _The Law of Nations_ (1758), Vol.1, Section 212, Des Citoyens et Naturels, a "citizen" is a member of the civil society. To become a "citizen" is to enter into society as a member thereof. On the other hand, Vattel wrote that a native or indigenes (written in French as /les naturels/ or /indigenes/) or “natural born Citizen” as the term later became translated from French into English, is a child born in the country of two citizen parents who have already entered into and become members of the society. Vattel also tells us that it is the “natural born Citizen” who will best preserve and perpetuate the society. This definition of the two distinct terms has been adopted by many United States Supreme Court decisions. (The Venus, 12 U.S. 253 (1814) and Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874) to cite just two.)

The original definition of "natural born Citizen" gives our Constitutional Republic the best chance of having a President and Commander in Chief of the Military who has sole and absolute allegiance, loyalty, and attachment to the United States. By satisfying all conditions of this definition, all other avenues of acquiring other foreign citizenships and allegiances (jus soli or by the soil and jus sanguinis or by descent) are cut off. Having all other means of acquiring other foreign citizenships or allegiances cut off is unity of citizenship which is what the President must have at the time of birth. Additionally, by requiring the child’s parents to be U.S. citizens best assures that those parents most likely will have absorbed American customs and values which, in turn, they will transmit to their child.

The “natural born Citizen” clause serves a critical purpose today and must be enforced in every Presidential election. The President has immense power, both civil and military. The clause assures the American people that their President does not have any conflicting allegiances or loyalties.

Dated a month after his birth on Dec. 22, 1970, it shows that Rafael Edward Cruz was born to Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, a “geophysical consultant” born in Matanzas, Cuba, and the former Eleanor Elizabeth Wilson, born in Wilmington, Del.

Her status made the baby a U.S. citizen at birth. For that, U.S. law required at least one parent who was a U.S. citizen who had lived for at least a decade in the United States.

She registered his birth with the U.S. consulate, Frazier said, and the future senator received a U.S. passport in 1986 ahead of a high school trip to England.

Rafael Cruz, now a pastor in suburban Dallas, fled Cuba for Texas as a teen in 1957. He remained a Cuban citizen until he became a naturalized American in 2005.

 

Supreme Court Cases that Cite “Natural Born Citizen” as One Born on U.S. Soil to Citizen Parents -

  • Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch[masked] (1814)
  • Shanks v DuPont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. [masked] (1830)
  • Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
  • Minor v Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
  • United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
  • Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)

·          

§ 215. Children of citizens born in a foreign country.
It is asked whether the children born of citizens in a foreign country are citizens? The laws have decided this question in several countries, and their regulations must be followed. By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights; the place of birth produces no change in this particular, and cannot, of itself, furnish any reason for taking from a child what nature has given him; I say "of itself," for, civil or political laws may, for particular reasons, ordain otherwise. But I suppose that the father has not entirely quitted his country in order to settle elsewhere. If he has fixed his abode in a foreign country, he is become a member of another society, at least as a perpetual inhabitant; and his children will be members of it also.

 





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Judith S. Brown ([address removed]) from Pittsburgh South Hills 9 12 Group.
To learn more about Judith S. Brown, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]
<States but not all Citizens of the Un.docx>

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy