Article

2016-05-02 -Land of the Free

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by charger 2016-05-02 00:00|| || Front Page|| [2 views ] Top

#1 Heidi Cruz told supporters one of her husband’s greatest strengths was that he is an immigrant

His greatest strength, IMO.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-05-02 00:24|| 2016-05-02 00:24|| Front Page Top

#2 His greatest strength, IMO.

Damning with faint sneers, I think that's called.

Posted by SteveS 2016-05-02 00:59|| 2016-05-02 00:59|| Front Page Top

#3 Trumpkins. So dopey they cannot understand a figurative term of speech. SMH. The Know Nothing party lives again, literally, figuratively.

Posted by Spuper Gleanter3720 2016-05-02 01:47|| 2016-05-02 01:47|| Front Page Top

#4 The troll is back. If you asked the original writers of the Constitution what they meant by the condition of native born, they would have said something along the lines of within the territory of the United States. Given the vast majority of people lived and died within 20 miles of where they were born, at the time, it would be a rational fit. Everything else is 'interpretation' cause we never go through amending the document since the failure of the Equal Rights Amendment did not set well with the ruling caste.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-05-02 07:12|| 2016-05-02 07:12|| Front Page Top

#5 Here are some court citations that show natural born is born of a parent that is a citizen - “natural born Citizen” includes persons born abroad who are citizens from birth based on the citizenship of a parent. That goes back to Blackstone and Vattel, upon whom the founding fathers rested their view of the law and that term. Congress has recognized since the Founding, a person born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is generally a U.S. citizen from birth with no need for naturalization.

This is also why citizenship should not be given to "anchor babies" of illegals.

8 U.S.C. § 1401(g) (2012); Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Pub. L. No. 82-414, § 303, 66 Stat. 163, 236–37; Act of May 24, 1934, Pub. L. No. 73-250, 48 Stat. 797.

Wisconsin v. Pelican Ins. Co., 127 U.S. 265, 297 (1888)

7 Ann., c. 5, § 3 (1708); see also British Nationality Act, 1730, 4 Geo. 2, c. 21.

1 William Blackstone, Commentaries *354–63.

Letter from John Jay to George Washington (July 25, 1787), in 3 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 61 (Max Farrand ed., 1911).

Posted by Black Bart Hupeaque8654 2016-05-02 07:54|| 2016-05-02 07:54|| Front Page Top

#6 And that's the interesting contradiction created by the courts, in that regardless of bloodline, if born in the US, the child is American, but falling back on bloodline, if he/she is born in Canada but linked by blood, he/she is not Canadian. We accept these as conveniences.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-05-02 08:37|| 2016-05-02 08:37|| Front Page Top

#7 I'm fond of the explanation given in this Harvard Law Review article from early last year on the subject. Key graph:

While some constitutional issues are truly difficult, with framing-era sources either nonexistent or contradictory, here, the relevant materials clearly indicate that a ânatural born Citizenâ means a citizen from birth with no need to go through naturalization proceedings. The Supreme Court has long recognized that two particularly useful sources in understanding constitutional terms are British common law and enactments of the First Congress. Both confirm that the original meaning of the phrase ânatural born Citizenâ includes persons born abroad who are citizens from birth based on the citizenship of a parent.

The article goes on to discuss these points, and adds that Congress's Naturalization Act of 1790 also extends natural born citizenship to the children of citizen mothers. And in fact the children of the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Jay were born abroad while he was serving the new United States as a diplomat. The article is a quick read with a minimum of legalese.

Posted by trailing wife 2016-05-02 09:58|| 2016-05-02 09:58|| Front Page Top

#8 I think Cruz lost this week. The combination of his wife accidentally throwing red meat to the "Canadian" crowd, Cruz calling a hoop a Basketball ring in Indiana, and the riots against Trump that are likely to help Trump in California.

It was like a perfect storm for Trump following his recent big election victories. I think Trump will end up getting the votes he needs after all and conspiracy folks will wonder if he paid the rioters himself to help throw him over the top.

Posted by rjschwarz 2016-05-02 11:43|| 2016-05-02 11:43|| Front Page Top

#9 I don't care anymore. He's not the guy. Choosing Carly Fiorina as his running mate was the last straw. But even before that he showed a disturbing tendency to distort the truth when talking about Trump. When a mob of OWS and #BlackLivesMatter types rioted at one of Trump's rallies, Cruz was all too quick to jump on the Democrat claim that Trump has fostered a culture of violence in his campaign. Bullshit...Cruz is full of it.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2016-05-02 12:10|| 2016-05-02 12:10|| Front Page Top

#10 Instapundit likes to quip that we have the worst political class ever. Of course, that could only be possible if we had the worst system for choosing politicians ever. This election season has made it obvious that we do.

Posted by Iblis 2016-05-02 17:37|| 2016-05-02 17:37|| Front Page Top

23:48 jvalentour
23:42 jvalentour
22:34 Beau
22:08 Rambler in Virginia
21:39 trailing wife
21:24 trailing wife
20:23 Dale
19:58 borgboy
19:56 borgboy
19:56 Bill Clinton
19:56 Zebulon Gling7280
19:53 Bill Clinton
19:45 borgboy
19:35 borgboy
19:35 Zenobia Floger6220
19:19 Skidmark
19:09 Skidmark
19:07 Skidmark
19:06 Skidmark
18:52 swksvolFF
18:49 Deadeye Bourbon2938
18:32 Ebbang Uluque6305
18:18 Cheamble Unegum3495
18:14 Cheamble Unegum3495