It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ted Cruz was born in Canada

page: 9
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2016 @ 11:42 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

supposedly she got her Canadian citizenship when her husband and her moved to Canada. They moved back to America four years after Cruz was born. That is what I read, I do not know if she had duel citizenship though. I also do not know if she finished getting her Canadian citizenship.

I read that somewhere on the net, but a lot of stuff on the net is not true. Where I read it it gave the years this happened. I can't remember what year that was or where the article is.




posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 05:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
And the framers deferred to natural law on this issue...hence the phrase "natural born Citizen."


Well, there are 2 types of citizen, naturalised and natural born. Obama was never naturalised, he is natural born.


I would argue there are citizens by positive law and those by natural law.

Obama is a citizen by positive law.

How is Obama a citizen of positive Law, wouldn't that assume he was made a citizen rather than born a citizen.


Because British Nationality laws and U.S. citizenship laws made him a dual national/citizen. Therefore he is not a natural born citizen.

Wrong he was born in America to an American that makes him a natural born citizen.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: yesyesyes

Where he happened to have been born is waaaay down on my list of reasons to never vote for Ted Cruz.

Funny that a lot of the same people who were foaming at the mouth about Obama's "ineligibility" are now defending Cruz's.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 06:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Open_Minded Skeptic
Funny that a lot of the same people who were foaming at the mouth about Obama's "ineligibility" are now defending Cruz's.


Let us see, Obama born in the USA, American mother = not eligible.... Cruz born in Canada, American mother = eligible!

Their twisted thinking to come up with that must be mind boggling!



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 07:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kitana
a reply to: yesyesyes

His mother is an American Citizen. He simply happened to be born outside the country, as is the case with many children of Americans who travel abroad, for one reason or another, whether work or military often means "natural born" Americans are born as Americans citizens yet in another country.



military bases and embassies are considered "us soil". If he was born on a military base or embassy compound, then yes he's "natural born". The fact that only 1 parent is an American, and he was born in a foreign country disqualify him. Obama too.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
i did try to point out to Tenth back a bit the way "natural born citizen" was originally drafted.

"natural born citizen" in the original draft came from common law, which is nothing more than a convention. All fine and dandy when there is no written constitution, however in the case of, "Natural born citizen" the meaning of was made clear back in the 1700's by English jurist William Blackstone, the preeminent authority on it.
What he defined was this, " natural-born citizens are “such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England,” while aliens are “such as are born out of it.”
This was adapted by James Madison, known as the 'Father of the Constitution,' He stated, “It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. . . . place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States.”
I don't think there is any doubt that the original draft meant you had to be born on American terra firma.. to be an American citizen...born in the USA

The final American constitution is a written and legal document, that actually includes a desired convention which had be found on by William Blackmore.
The thing is, anything else that came after such as children being born abroad etc; is just tinkering and has no basis as far as the founding fathers and their constitution are concerned.
Now, you can't dig 'em up to make them change their minds, while it is clear as it stands, that anything other than being born in the USA would preclude a person from being a US president, according to the written constitution.

The only real debate is should the constitution be changed.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: yesyesyes

I'm not sure if anyone has yet answered your question about how the founding fathers defined natural born citizen, so I'll just leave these for you -- with my apologies if I'm being redundant.

At the time the Constitution was written, "natural born citizen" had been defined by (at least) two legal scholars: Emmerich de Vattel in his "Law of Nations," and William Blackstone in his "Commentaries,". They would have also been influenced the natural law philosopher (and personal friend to many of the founding fathers), John Locke.

From Chapter XIX of the Law of Nations:


§ 212. Citizens and natives. 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. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.


(There is more on the subject at the link, such as children born to citizen parents abroad, etc.)

From Blackstone's Commentaries:


The first and most obvious division of the people is into aliens and natural-born subjects. Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England, that is, within the ligeance, or as it is generally called, the allegiance of the king; and aliens, such as are born out of it. Allegiance is the tie, or ligamen, which binds the subject to the king, in return for that protection which the king affords the subject. The thing itself, or substantial part of it, is founded in reason and the nature of government; the name and the form are derived to us from our Gothic ancestors.


(Again, there is far more at the link).

Mario Apuzzo (an attorney who also challenges both Cruz and Obama's natural born citizenship), has more on both, and on John Locke here.

One more thing that is pertinent, is that Rep Alan Grayson (D-Fl) is promising to challenge Cruz's eligibility in court if he wins the nomination, based on Mrs. Cruz' American citizenship -- or, more specifically, her lack thereof:


...we found that his mother was on a Canadian voter list which strongly suggests she’s a Canadian citizen. There’s no other way to get on a Canadian voter list and if she was a Canadian citizen, she took the oath of citizenship voluntarily, then that means she lost her US citizenship.


Source

I hope this helps understand the current quagmire we find ourselves in



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: yesyesyes

Geez guys....if American me and my pregnant wife are living in or vacationing in some other country like Zambia for gosh sakes....if she delivers there...the newborn is American...

You guys are pretty ridiculously funny!!!

Pffffffft!



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Can anyone show me any actual documentation (before 2008) that would show that Cruz is eligible?

(Apologies if someone already has)



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: yesyesyes

originally posted by: buster2010
The problem with the term natural born citizen is there really is no definition of the term and it doesn't say what it is in the constitution. Cruz is of course a American citizen because his mother was a citizen but is he a natural born citizen? I don't think he should be called one because he was born in another country. So no he shouldn't be able to run for president.


I agree.

Does anyone really think George Washington thought a guy born in Canada should be the leader of America?

I just don't see it at all.

That's how we do it.
Expect a Tim Hortons on every corner and poutine salesmen coming up to your door riding a moose while wearing a beavercoat.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Can anyone show me any actual documentation (before 2008) that would show that Cruz is eligible?

(Apologies if someone already has)


Are dual citizens eligible? If so, he's fine. He denounced his Cdn citizenship only a couple of years ago.

American mother, she was also dual citizenship, that shouldn't matter, she was still a US citizen.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger

And what if you and your wife take up residence in Zambia, become Zambian citizens and vote in the Zambian elections, and then have a child?

It's a ridiculous, outdated requirement anyway, and contrary to opinions you'll see espoused, since the Constitution doesn't specifically define 'natural born citizen' for eligibility purposes, and the Supreme Court has never ruled on it, it's an open question.

The Constitution should be amended to remove the 'natural born' requirement and replace it with a citizenship and residency requirement. Say 30 or even 35 years for example.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: yeahright

I agree.

The whole "natural born citizen" thing should be removed/amended.

It's the 21st century, nobody back in the day would have imagined that people could travel to and fro so easily.

If you're a full legal citizen of the USA (born there or not) and you have the right to vote in elections, then you should have the right to run for president.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kitana
a reply to: buster2010

Funny how the same people who defended Obama screamed it at us for years how legal it is, yet when it is someone they don't like suddenly its an issue. If its not an issue for Obama then it shouldn't be an issue for cruz.. at least cruz isn't trying to hide the fact.


Technically the only person who made it an issue was Donald Trump. The Democrats were having little to do with that bear and poking it.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: yeahright

Agreed....but that's not the case and there are more "what ifs" in your reply than mine.

But, understood. Thanks



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: snowspirit

Can you source that?

No one has yet to show me anything in the Constitution or congressional law that states that Cruz is a natural born citizen.

Was he "naturalized"? Yes.

Was he natural born? No.

Unless I see a definition prior to 2008 that states that an individual born of an American parent in another country is a natural born citizen, I will state that Cruz is ineligible and cannot run for president.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   
I was watching Fox in my office when they spoke of this.

In 1952, the year Cruz was born, a person could be determined to be a natural born citizen if at least one parent was a US citizen.

According to congressional law at the time.

So I stand corrected.

Cruz is eligible.

Sorry.




edit on 14-1-2016 by DBCowboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: acackohfcc
The fact that only 1 parent is an American, and he was born in a foreign country disqualify him. Obama too.


Obama was born in the USA.... so why does being born in the USA disqualify someone?



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: snowspirit

Can you source that?

No one has yet to show me anything in the Constitution or congressional law that states that Cruz is a natural born citizen.

Was he "naturalized"? Yes.


Then show us his naturalisation certificate.... when was he naturalised?

As he was born a citizen, not naturalised he is eligible.



posted on Jan, 14 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   
i just heard a "constitutional scholar" on the radio state that Ted Cruz is NOT eligible to be president because he is
not a natural born citizen. The fact that the automatic or process of naturalization occurred to him means that by definition, Cruz is not a natural born citizen. This person went on to say that base questions about constitutional questions need to reference COMMON LAW (because common law is the basic of constitutional law) and based upon common law, a person born on different soil is not natural born.




top topics



 
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join