General Discussion

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)

44. This seems ridiculous to me. A person recognized as a citizen without

Thu Jan 14, 2016, 05:53 PM

Jan 2016

the need for a naturalization process must be considered a natural-born citizen.

Who makes the rules for that? Congress, as defined by the Constitution. It is a legislative, not a judicial, power.

Congress' interpretation of citizenship law is dispositive, because they are granted that right in the Constitution (which refers to "naturalization" as the process of acquiring citizenship by those who didn't have it at birth). If Cruz has not been naturalized because Congress has ruled that he is a natural born citizen and the Supreme Court were to rule that he is not a natural-born citizen, the SC would be depriving Cruz of his citizenship.

Somehow, I think the justices would all have a belly laugh at this idea and never take the case, unless they thought it was going to be so much fun that they decided to take it.

No SC is ever going to start ruling that people who have always been considered citizens by Congress are not.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

91 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ted Cruz’s birther problem grows as more constitutional law scholars say he can’t be president [View all] UCmeNdc Jan 2016 OP

The irony is that until the advent of DNA testing exboyfil Jan 2016 #1

Paternity tests do not require DNA testing. Manifestor_of_Light Jan 2016 #51

Whatever it takes to derail cruz. SammyWinstonJack Jan 2016 #2

I agree! yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #3

But diplomats (and military?) might qualify IF elleng Jan 2016 #5

Update our requirements.....? suston96 Jan 2016 #11

Yeah, disallow kids born overseas to military parents. That's fair. tabasco Jan 2016 #12

Well then vote for Cruz then. He was born overseas. yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #20

Riiiiiiight. tabasco Jan 2016 #21

No. Your just mad that I called you out yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #22

If you can't win ethically... TipTok Jan 2016 #54

You took one part of my post and made a nasty remark about it yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #64

I think it is already settled... 403Forbidden Jan 2016 #30

Thanks for the laughs. Who else should be disqualified ? Bonx Jan 2016 #40

Wow. yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #41

Do we want to derail Cruz? Jim Lane Jan 2016 #23

I suspect SCOTUS would uphold his eligibility but Scalia and Thomas might vote no. yellowcanine Jan 2016 #4

What happens if he wins and it SC does this on January 25th, 2017? Reter Jan 2016 #6

Nothing because SCOTUS would rule in his favor. yellowcanine Jan 2016 #7

Perhaps two liberal Justices would vote against him Reter Jan 2016 #8

No they would not. It is not the way liberal justices rule. yellowcanine Jan 2016 #13

Until it happens, you can't be 100% sure of their votes Reter Jan 2016 #18

The most plausible argument I've seen ... starroute Jan 2016 #9

Other than that great Constitutional Scholar Orly Taitz, there was not one single issuerelated to malaise Jan 2016 #10

Well thanks a lot. I had pretty much forgotten that horrible woman. yellowcanine Jan 2016 #15

She was so stupid that she was hilarious malaise Jan 2016 #17

Only the Supreme Court can decide. tabasco Jan 2016 #14

There are PLENTY more pressing reasons to be worried about Cruz being POTUS Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2016 #16

Sorry Canada, but he should be deported back to his home country. B Calm Jan 2016 #19

Gosh. All that hate down the drain. Octafish Jan 2016 #24

This is pretty simple, FFS. At least one of his parents must be or have been a naturalized US underahedgerow Jan 2016 #25

Well no. "Natural born citizen" is the requirement to be President. DirkGently Jan 2016 #52

It's amazing how quickly folks will jump on the birther nutjob bandwagon... TipTok Jan 2016 #55

The U.S. does not recognize dual citizenship. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #26

Yeah, that's completely wrong Bonx Jan 2016 #33

I did not say that dual citizenship is not tolerated, Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #37

You said the US does not recognize it, which it does. Bonx Jan 2016 #38

Either a person is a U.S. citizen, or they are not. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #39

You are wrong. former9thward Jan 2016 #50

As long as Trump is a U.S. citizen, he can vote in the U.S. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #59

I understood that post to mean Mariana Jan 2016 #83

Completely, totally, 100% wrong n/t SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2016 #43

I am dual citizen awake Jan 2016 #53

The U.S. does not care what other country claims you as a citizen. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #56

You said "The U.S. does not recognize dual citizenship." awake Jan 2016 #60

If you earn income in the U.S., Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #61

A us citizen has to report and pay taxes on their world wide income as awake Jan 2016 #62

Yep. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #67

once again you do not know of where you speak awake Jan 2016 #71

Whether you vote or not in Canadian elections is of no concern to the U.S. government. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #58

Please reread your own post awake Jan 2016 #65

As far as rights are given to U.S. citizens, Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #66

What you are missing is that unlike what you said awake Jan 2016 #68

Please give me an example. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #70

As I have said above I am the example, awake Jan 2016 #72

In what way? Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #73

Immigration agents at the border have recognized both of my passports and citizenships awake Jan 2016 #78

Thank you for helping me to prove my point. Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #84

Why didn't we hear this shit for McCain? KentuckyWoman Jan 2016 #27

Exception for "natural born" requirement for Founding Fathers 403Forbidden Jan 2016 #28

Chester Arthur. Charles Hughes. Barry Goldwater. George Romney. KentuckyWoman Jan 2016 #31

Arthur was born in Vermont, Hughes in New York Retrograde Jan 2016 #63

here's the text 403Forbidden Jan 2016 #29

That's absolutely not settled TeddyR Jan 2016 #34

The Canal Zone was US territory treestar Jan 2016 #86

Huge difference Reter Jan 2016 #91

If a couple more join in... Bonx Jan 2016 #32

Which other provisions of the Constitution TeddyR Jan 2016 #35

I find this narrative ridculous Bonx Jan 2016 #36

Do you consider Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe a nutter? nt 403Forbidden Jan 2016 #42

Do you think the courts would try and prevent someone with Cruz birth situation from the presidency? Bonx Jan 2016 #89

This seems ridiculous to me. A person recognized as a citizen without Yo_Mama Jan 2016 #44

Well we know for a fact that their are two types of Citizens... 403Forbidden Jan 2016 #45

Nothing in the Constitution can justify that theory. Nothing!!! Yo_Mama Jan 2016 #46

I didn't argue for, or against, any theory. I just said there is a legitimate question... 403Forbidden Jan 2016 #48

No. There is not a 'legitimate question". Even the lawyers agree they are merely arguing the points underahedgerow Jan 2016 #75

No one is arguing that Cruz is not a US Citizen... 403Forbidden Jan 2016 #76

There is a question as to whether or not Cruz' mother is an American citizen leftofcool Jan 2016 #77

It doesn't. He was born to a US citizen, therefore he is entitled to run for the office of President underahedgerow Jan 2016 #79

I agree leftofcool Jan 2016 #87

I have no idea if he's kosher to be President... Bigmack Jan 2016 #47

One wonders if he'd pick a horrible running mate like tRump KamaAina Jan 2016 #49

If he gets the nomination someone will take it to the "Supreme Court" and we all know the demosincebirth Jan 2016 #57

So nobody born via cesarean, either? X_Digger Jan 2016 #69

Delightful Karma Mnpaul Jan 2016 #74

I have the feeling that the Republicans yuiyoshida Jan 2016 #80

They only care when a black democrat who was born in the USA. Republicans B Calm Jan 2016 #85

Well they Hate Obama yuiyoshida Jan 2016 #88

As a fellow Calgarian, I will be soooo disappointed if they arthritisR_US Jan 2016 #81

Professor Tribe called Cruz... 3catwoman3 Jan 2016 #82

CNN was talking to a Harvard Law professor of Cruz's about applegrove Jan 2016 #90