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 is NOT ELIGIBLE to be POTUS, nor is Rubio: Confirmed

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce
They would have to prove it in a court of law. If it is the real document, then the people at the State department should be able to verify such. And if he produces a forgery, he goes to jail on a felony charge of forging an official federal document.




posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: hellobruce
They would have to prove it in a court of law.


Why do you think that? What court, who would start a case there?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: avgguy
If Obama was eligible then Cruz is, it's the exact same scenario.


Obama was born in the USA, Cruz was not. It did not matter the nationality of Obama's parents, he still is a natural born US citizen.

Your video is someone who's membership of the Florida bar lapsed...


It's the exact same situation. Location does not matter. Parent citizenship matters.

In both Obama's and Cruz' case their mothers were American citizen. I would argue that Obama and Cruz were both born with dual citizenship and should not be considered Natural Born, but Obama killed that precedent when a majority of Electoral votes made him President. Twice.
edit on 26-2-2016 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Location does not matter. Parent citizenship matters.


nonsense, as the courts have stated, being born in the USA, (with 2 exceptions) means the baby is a natural born US citizen!


I would argue that Obama and Cruz were both born with dual citizenship and should not be considered Natural Born,


Natural born has nothing at all to do with dual citizenship...


but Obama killed that precedent when a majority of Electoral votes made him President. Twice.


No, the courts killed that claim.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   
I think the whole 'natural born citizen" thing is based on whether or not a person is 'naturally' a citizen. Through nature, so to speak. For example, Angelina and Brad have many children who they have ADOPTED from other lands. Those children are American citizens now, but they are not natural born citizens. They weren't born to American citizens, and neither were they born on American soil. They were adopted from another land. They may NOT be President.

Ted Cruz, on the other hand, can be. Because he was naturally born to a natural born citizen.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: avgguy
If Obama was eligible then Cruz is, it's the exact same scenario.


Obama was born in the USA, Cruz was not. It did not matter the nationality of Obama's parents, he still is a natural born US citizen.

Your video is someone who's membership of the Florida bar lapsed...


It's the exact same situation. Location does not matter. Parent citizenship matters.



Wrong. If the child is born in America, that child is a natural born citizen. (Except diplomats and something else)

Doesn't matter where the parents are born.
edit on 26-2-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   
It must feel amazing to have silenced all debate with race baiting and ridicule for the last 8 years and only have one opinion to discuss.

That's what i think.

This debate is not worth it. That's what i think, too.

Enjoy the circle jerk.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Location does not matter. Parent citizenship matters.


nonsense, as the courts have stated, being born in the USA, (with 2 exceptions) means the baby is a natural born US citizen!


Incorrect. There has never been a ruling made on the child of illegal aliens, aka 'undocumented migrants.' It is just taken for granted that they are US citizens.

Please, go ahead and look for a court ruling. The best you'll find is Ark vs USA, and his parents were documented Chinese migrants with green cards who worked on the railroads. Ie, they were 'subject to the jurisdiction.'



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Location does not matter. Parent citizenship matters.


nonsense, as the courts have stated, being born in the USA, (with 2 exceptions) means the baby is a natural born US citizen!


Incorrect. There has never been a ruling made on the child of illegal aliens, aka 'undocumented migrants.' It is just taken for granted that they are US citizens.

Please, go ahead and look for a court ruling. The best you'll find is Ark vs USA, and his parents were documented Chinese migrants with green cards who worked on the railroads. Ie, they were 'subject to the jurisdiction.'


Constitution



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
It must feel amazing to have silenced all debate with race baiting and ridicule


Wrong again, the debate was silenced by facts that birthers could not argue against, although some tried!


This debate is not worth it.


Because, like Obama's birther debate, on one side you have people who have facts and court cases, on the other side you have birthers just making crap up - like the OP linking to a site quoting Vattel, which has nothing to do with the US constitution!



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Ie, they were 'subject to the jurisdiction.'


Anyone born in the USA is "subject to the jurisdiction....

try actually reading the court case, and you will see!


Upholding the concept of jus soli (citizenship based on place of birth),[114] the Court held that the Citizenship Clause needed to be interpreted in light of English common law,[115] which had included as subjects virtually all native-born children, excluding only those who were born to foreign rulers or diplomats, born on foreign public ships, or born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation of the country's territory.[116][117][118] The court's majority held that the subject to the jurisdiction phrase in the Citizenship Clause excluded from U.S. citizenship only those persons covered by one of these three exceptions (plus a fourth "single additional exception" —namely, that Indian tribes "not taxed" were not considered subject to U.S. jurisdiction).[55][119] The majority concluded that none of these four exceptions to U.S. jurisdiction applied to Wong; in particular, they observed that "during all the time of their said residence in the United States, as domiciled residents therein, the said mother and father of said Wong Kim Ark were engaged in the prosecution of business, and were never engaged in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China".[78]

edit on 26-2-2016 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

That adopted thing sounds real familiar.

Maybe somebody like that is already President !!!!!




edit on Feb-26-2016 by xuenchen because: fore



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Location does not matter. Parent citizenship matters.


nonsense, as the courts have stated, being born in the USA, (with 2 exceptions) means the baby is a natural born US citizen!


Incorrect. There has never been a ruling made on the child of illegal aliens, aka 'undocumented migrants.' It is just taken for granted that they are US citizens.

Please, go ahead and look for a court ruling. The best you'll find is Ark vs USA, and his parents were documented Chinese migrants with green cards who worked on the railroads. Ie, they were 'subject to the jurisdiction.'


Is "being able to read and comprehend the 14th amendment" the same thing as "taking for granted" in this case?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
That adopted thing sounds real familiar.

Maybe somebody like that is already President


As Obama was never adopted, what are you babbling about?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958

As per the definition used by the original framers of the U.S. Constitution, ratified on July 4, 1776,


Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788

The post was a non starter, couldn't make it past the first line.
edit on 26-2-2016 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee
Let me make this perfectly clear for you. John McCain was born to not one , but 2 US Citizens. McCain was born when his father was in the military. So , therefore his parents were living in the US. Military base. A US military base is considered US soil just as much as Dallas , Texas. Therefore , it doesnt matter what hospital the country was in. The parents were still living in the US.
I.E do not be ridiculous with your rhetoric and stop listening to what your neighbors say.
Unless you want to question me being a US citizen . I was born in a hospital in Stuttgart , Germany.





posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
A US military base is considered US soil just as much as Dallas , Texas. Therefore , it doesnt matter what hospital the country was in. The parents were still living in the US.


Wrong actually!


Contrary to popular belief, military bases are not considered "U.S. soil" for citizenship purposes. - See more at: military.findlaw.com...

also
en.wikipedia.org...
www.kerchner.com...



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Annee
Let me make this perfectly clear for you. John McCain was born to not one , but 2 US Citizens. McCain was born when his father was in the military. So , therefore his parents were living in the US. Military base. A US military base is considered US soil just as much as Dallas , Texas. Therefore , it doesnt matter what hospital the country was in. The parents were still living in the US.
I.E do not be ridiculous with your rhetoric and stop listening to what your neighbors say.
Unless you want to question me being a US citizen . I was born in a hospital in Stuttgart , Germany.




I am fully aware of that.

What date did the US make it official that children born on foreign soil of military parents are natural born citizens? Not just citizens, but natural born. It was after McCain was born.



Most statutes conferring nationality/citizenship at birth were passed before most of the individuals to whom they apply were born. Some, however, were retroactive. An example of that was the statute that made McCain a U.S. citizen at birth, passed after his birth. But that is naturalization, not natural birth. www.constitution.org...

edit on 26-2-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Scared of Cruz huh?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 11:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Gothmog
A US military base is considered US soil just as much as Dallas , Texas. Therefore , it doesnt matter what hospital the country was in. The parents were still living in the US.


Wrong actually!


Contrary to popular belief, military bases are not considered "U.S. soil" for citizenship purposes. - See more at: military.findlaw.com...

also
en.wikipedia.org...
www.kerchner.com...


I don't know if it was ever resolved exactly what hospital McCain was born in. Some claim it was not the military hospital. However, after he was born, a "law" was made giving natural born status to children of US military -- born on foreign soil. So, an official group got together and did a retro-active for McCain. Obama was there. He signed it.

Out of all the candidates McCain was the only one really not eligible --- without a little paperwork on the side.




top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join