#4
Trump's position is on the judicial construct of two sets of standing on libel laws, one for public and another for private individuals. The standards for the former are near impossible to meet. This smacks as a vast contradiction to the courts expansive use of the 14th Amendment and equal standing before the law. Either we're equal in standing before the law or we are not. Mr Zimmerman lost his libel case against those who clearly manipulated the information to present a political narrative because the defendants were able to convince the sitting judge that he was a public personality. Yet, they created the 'public person' by their very own action. So, on this one, I'd have to side to have one standard for all.
New York Times v. Sullivan is well worth the look.
At what point do you want to be exposed to a law suit, or worse, criminal prosecution for calling any politician "an idiot?" Would the only affirmative defense rely upon an administered I.Q. test?
Even if the appellation "idiot" is demonstrably false, losing the ability to describe those with whom you disagree with certain time-tested epithets seems like a move in the wrong direction.
Dear Heidi is a very clever and successful money person, and no doubt she is very aware of the legal aspects of her profession, but this makes no sense. One can't be an immigrant to the country of which one is a natural born citizen.
#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.
#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).
#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.
#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.
#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.
#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.
#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.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
