In an interview, Senator Cruz own words disqualify his eligibility to serve as President.
By J.B. Williams
March 29, 2015
Following the War of Independence separating America from Great Britain and establishing a new free sovereign nation, our Founders set a course to establish a Constitutional Representative Republican form of self-governance, of, by and for the people of the newly formed United States with the passage of the U.S. Constitution.
Ever since, political powers here and abroad have sought to undermine, dismantle and destroy the United States and eliminate it as the world’s most free, prosperous and powerful nation on earth.
Two hundred years later, trapped in a growing global shift towards a One World system of global governance based on communist principles of social justice, the United States would soon find itself in a silent battle for its sovereignty and security emanating from within…
Fast forward to 2004 – when a totally obscure new Illinois State Senator was paraded on to the national stage by none other than Sen. Ted Kennedy, (who had very close ties with Vladimir Putin, then head of the Russian KGB) – strangely upstaging the intended star of the show, Democrat presidential nominee John Kerry. Four years later, the man with no verifiable past would become the first truly anti-American occupant of the Oval Office under color of fraud.
His name is Barack Hussein Obama and Barry Soetoro and Barack Hussein Obama Soebarkah. He was born to a Kenyan Father and a young American mother, in Hawaii as the story goes, and grew up an Indonesian citizen for a time. He has more than twenty Social Security numbers attached to his name[s] – and six years later, all records sealed, not one American citizen can tell you for sure who or what this person really is…
But we have watched him destroy our country at light speed for six years – stirring up racial divides, seizing more and more dictatorial executive powers, taking over entire private economic sectors, importing illegal aliens and illegal Islamic “refugees” at a record pace, driving our nation to nearly $20 trillion in debt, setting records in Military KIA and WIA under suicidal ROE, losing Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Pakistan and numerous others, undermining every constitutional concept, installing Muslim Brotherhood members throughout federal offices and national security agencies, as well as in numerous Middle Eastern nations by directly interfering in their elections, and swapping old U.S. allies for old U.S. enemies and placing our oldest Middle Eastern ally on the chopping block, Israel.
If the goal is to destroy the United States, no one has ever done it better than Barack Hussein Obama.
Our Founders made it possible for us to prevent such events, by placing very narrow and specific requirements for the Oval Office in Article II of the Constitution… all the American people had to do to prevent this disaster was enforce the Constitution.
The Founders kept it very simple… to be eligible for the Oval Office, President or Vice President; one has to meet the following conditions -
1. One must be a natural born Citizen of the United States, a True Citizen
2. One must be at least 35 years of age
3. One must have held U.S. residency for at least 14 years prior
That’s all, three very simple requirements established to prevent someone like Barack Hussein Obama from ever entering the Oval Office, someone with unknown, foreign, dual or divided national loyalties. Barack Obama has demonstrated for six years now that he is loyal to global interests, not U.S. interests.
Barack Obama met condition number two and three, but he did not and cannot meet condition number one, the natural born Citizen requirement. That is the condition that should have prevented him from ever stepping foot in the people’s Oval Office six years ago. It didn’t stop him, because the people failed to enforce Article II of the U.S. Constitution, or even hold their representatives accountable for sitting silent as it happened.
Many Americans, millions, wanted the constitutional crisis addressed and resolved over the past six years, filing law suits, FOIA requests seeking information on who Barack Obama really is and where he really came from, calling for impeachment, both for the fraud that allowed him to seize the White House and the many treasonous acts he has committed while in that office.
But the political will of the masses was just not there. Million’s more would be focused only upon removing him from fraudulent power via the election booth, without realizing that he was now in control of everything, including elections and was rapidly turning the nation on its head.
Back in 2012, a new young up and coming hot shot Republican was emerging in the great once very conservative state of Texas. He was, like Obama, a Harvard trained lawyer, except he actually had more on his résumé than communist community organizing.
In a campaign interview during his freshman senate race, a GOP Texas State Committee member sat down with the young candidate to ask a few poignant vetting questions, and here are the questions and answers from that interview… (Redacted information is to protect the witness at this moment, but the witness is willing to offer sworn testimony)
Interviewer: “Hello Mr. Cruz, it's a pleasure to meet you. My name is (redacted). I am a (redacted) County GOP Precinct Chair and you have my support and vote. I have one question for you if I may?”Cruz: “Sure, go ahead.”Interviewer: “What is your understanding of how one becomes a natural born Citizen?”Cruz: “Two citizen parents and born on the soil.”Interviewer: “Not exactly, but as I don't have enough time to fully explain how one does become an natural born Citizen, based on your understanding, would you agree that Barack Obama is ineligible to be POTUS?”Cruz: “I would agree.”Interviewer: “So when we get you elected, will you expose him for the usurping fraud he is?”Cruz: “No, my main focus will be on repealing Obamacare.”Interviewer: “But Mr. Cruz, if he is exposed as the usurping fraud he is, everything he has done will become null and void. Everything!”Interviewer: “At that point, Cruz reiterated his main concern, so it was obvious the conversation was over as far as Cruz was concerned. I thanked him for his time and wished him success in the runoff.”
That senate race was highly unusual. Redistricting had caused setbacks delaying the elections and election results. Cruz was running to replace Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison who had just retired and vacated her seat. At the originally scheduled time for the primary, Republican Cruz opponent Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst was well ahead in the polls. But by the time the election took place, Cruz had had enough time to slip ahead with more name recognition, in the end defeating his opponent and going on to defeat Democrat Paul Sadler in the general election, becoming only one of three Latino’s in the U.S. Senate.
That was 2012, and in July of 2013, Sen. Ted Cruz was beginning to make a name for himself, a somewhat outspoken freshman senator, sometimes frustrating GOP establishment RINOs like Sen. Mitch McConnell with his on camera grandstanding, much to the delight of his growing fan base in the Tea Party movement.
Members of the Tea Party, once focused on Constitutional Government, were beginning to see Cruz as more than just a U.S. Senator. In their search for a “real true constitutional conservative” to help regain control of an out of control runaway federal juggernaut under Obama, he seemed a breath of fresh air for millions of Republicans and Libertarians across the country.
That’s when calls for him to seek the Oval Office in 2016 started to take shape, and that’s when Sen. Ted Cruz became very concerned about a fact that he knew, but had never disclosed to the public, including during his Senate campaign a year earlier… Ted Cruz was born a Canadian citizen at birth, and remained a legal citizen of Canada, all the way up until May14, 2014.
In short, Sen. Ted Cruz was a legal citizen of Canada when he ran for and became a U.S. Senator, without ever having disclosed his Canadian citizenship to Texas voters, which under both Texas and U.S. Election law, is an act of fraud. Ted Cruz had committed election fraud by failing to disclose to Texas voters that he was a Canadian citizen in 2012.
No one can say for certain, but I think it is a very fair guess, that had Ted Cruz disclosed to Texas voters in 2012, that he had always been and remained at that time a legal citizen of Canada, his Republican opponent, Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst, would have won that race and become the next U.S. Senator from Texas.
Ted made a huge mistake… He messed with Texas!
Soon, it was the Tea Party wave of support that caused Sen. Ted Cruz to take an interest in running for president in 2016, forcing Cruz to now deal with a fact that was sure to become public in a presidential campaign… he was a Canadian citizen.
On August 18, 2013 the Dallas Morning News published a copy of the birth records released by Sen. Ted Cruz, his Canadian birth records. The story opened the debate over Cruz eligibility for the Oval Office and unlike Obama, who had issued a number of forged certifications of live birth to support his eligibility claim, Cruz had just proven that he was a Canadian citizen at birth by releasing his Canadian birth record.
Many immediately scrambled for damage control, alleging that maybe he was a “dual citizen” at birth via his American born mother. But there were no U.S. documents supporting that claim to be found…
Enter the Harvard lawyers… the same lawyers that had been protecting Barack Hussein Obama for six years… Cruz was advised by his legal friends to immediately renounce his Canadian citizenship, which he did, on May 14, 2014…
…and by June of 2014, friends and supporters at Fox News were beginning to clear his path to the White House by floating the idea that Ted was now a natural born Citizen of the United States, based upon renouncing his Canadian citizenship.
Of course, two critical problems remained… Renouncing his Canadian citizenship affected his Canadian citizenship, but not his citizenship records in the United States, which so far, appear not to exist even today.
As Ronald Reagan would say, here we go again, with a freshman Senator, a Harvard Lawyer, with Harvard law friends and no U.S. documentation to prove that Ted Cruz is a U.S. citizen of any type. A man with known foreign origins, and the son of a Father, Rafael Cruz Sr. who was at no time in his life a legal citizen of the United States until 35 years after Ted’s birth in Canada, when he renounced his Canadian citizenship and naturalized to the United States in 2005.
The problems were quite obvious… unlike Obama, who had taken great care to forge a false documented past before running for office, Ted had already proven to the world that he was not a natural born U.S. Citizen at birth, but rather a documented Canadian citizen at birth.
Not only had he committed election fraud by not disclosing to Texas voters that he was a Canadian citizen in 2012, now he was about to join Barack Hussein Obama in an even greater national effort to defraud all American voters by seeking the U.S. Oval Office less than a year after renouncing his Canadian citizenship.
Back on December 18, 2013, the North American Law Center was anticipating this sad moment in history when they directed a certified letter to Sen. Ted Cruz essentially begging him not to step out on this political limb, as he has many enemies ready to saw it off. Cruz never responded to that letter…
Enter the Harvard lawyers again… On March 11, 2015 – two Harvard law friends published a Harvard Law Review opinion declaring both Ted Cruz and Barack Hussein Obama “natural born Citizens” of the United States.
The key opinion in the entire legal wordsmithing document is this…
“While some constitutional issues are truly difficult, with framing-era sources either nonexistent or contradictory, here, the relevant materials clearly indicate that a “natural born Citizen” means a citizen from birth with no need to go through naturalization proceedings.”
What the Harvard experts are saying is this, gee, we just can’t find any documents to confirm the Founders intent of the term natural born Citizen, and so, we think it means this… a “citizen at birth” is a “natural born Citizen.”
Never mind that Harvard and Yale law buddies had already decided that “illegal aliens” are really just “undocumented citizens,” or that they long ago twisted naturalization laws to make “illegal aliens” born on U.S. soil “anchor babies” who are also considered to be “citizens at birth.”
The legal experts have now expanded all of our naturalization terms to mean “natural born Citizen,” using naturalization amendments, cases and statues to do it. In so doing, they are eliminating the true meaning and purpose of the Article II natural born Citizen requirement from our Constitution without having to endure the cumbersome process of actually amending the Constitutional legally.
And, what was once a long fought leftist battle to eliminate all Constitutional foundations for sovereign government by a sovereign nation and of its sovereign citizens, has now been joined by Republicans like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal, none of whom are actually eligible for the Oval Office, and all of whom know it.
Only days later, on the heels of the Harvard opinion piece, Sen. Ted Cruz stood among 12,000 Liberty University students forced to attend the event, and announced he was running for the office of President.
If you ask the average American citizen what natural born Citizen is, they do not know. Even many, who think they know, do not know. Since Barack Obama, numerous definitions based on numerous political agendas have been floated, making what was once a very common simple term too ambiguous to enforce.
The people have allowed the lawyers to amend the Constitution by simply publishing a legal opinion.
And today, we are witnessing the death of the American Presidency… from this point forward, any person born anywhere on earth to any foreign Father or Mother can be president of the United States in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.
The only documentation Obama ever proffered was a forged COLB (Certification of Live Birth, not birth certificate) from Hawaii, which Hawaii prints off and hands out like bingo cards at a Saturday night church social… and the only documentation Ted Cruz has proffered is proof that he was born a Canadian citizen at birth and remained such until May 14, 2014… on this basis, Harvard Law experts say both can be president…
Now, what does natural born Citizen really mean and why did our Founder’s choose that term in an overt effort to prevent people like Barack Obama, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Vladimir Putin and bin Laden’s son from ever gaining access to the Oval Office?
The answer is found in the Founders statements identifying the source of the term, Vattel’s international treatise on Natural Law, The Law of Nations, book 1 – Chapter XIX. Every American can easily find it, read it, understand it and know it. There is nothing at all ambiguous about it… unless you let your political agenda drive your facts.
The true definition of the natural born Citizen requirement for the Oval Office as described throughout the entirety of Chapter XIX can be summed up in this section from 212…
“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.”
Barack Obama’s Father was never a U.S. Citizen. Ted Cruz’s Father was never a U.S. citizen either, until he naturalized 35 years after Ted’s birth. Ted remained a legal citizen of Canada until he renounced his Canadian citizenship on May 14, 2014. Without any U.S. documents, Ted is now a man without a country, according to any authentic documentation. Is Ted Cruz just an “illegal alien” holding a U.S. Senate seat and running for President?
Nothing pertaining to naturalization pertains to natural born, nothing. Naturalization is the process by which an alien (non-citizen) becomes an American citizen.
Natural born Citizenship is a Natural Law term describing a condition that either exists or does not exist at the moment of birth. There is nothing anyone can do to become a natural born Citizen, once they were not born a natural born Citizen. Lies offered by Ivy League lawyers to the contrary are offered with the explicit intent to alter the Founder’s intent, and once again, they know it… It is a Common Law practice they all learned in law school. Common Law is the legal British practice of openly subverting Constitutional Law.
So, people with no U.S. documentation, “undocumented citizens” according to Ivy League lawyers, are “natural born Citizens” and average citizens must rely upon Ivy League Law experts (or judges, political appointees) to help Americans figure out what the true meaning of “is” is… a term the average American is not intelligent enough to figure out for themselves. This is not a new tactic, Hitler did it with the help of Goebbels, Marx did it, Castro did it, Stalin and Lenin did it, even Hugo Chavez did it…
That is the worst part of this entire saga in the demise of the United States… The people put their politics ahead of their Constitution and as a result, they are about to let it all slip away, their freedom and liberty, all of it.
The mission to globalize the United States is only possible once it is no longer a requirement that only a True American, a natural born Citizen, can hold the office of Commander-in-Chief. The people appear willing to accept this now.
AUTHOR NOTE: Everything presented in this column is verifiable fact. Now we will see how many American patriots care about these facts.
© 2015 JB Williams - All Rights Reserved
Click here to visit NewsWithViews.com home page.
JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner. He is co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization preparing to take on American's greatest legal battles. Williams receives mail at: email@example.com
Web site 1: www.PatriotsUnion.org
Web site 2: www.VeteranDefenders.org
Michael--I CHALLENGE YOU--show us in the Constitution where it actually says what a "natural born" citizen is. There is NO LEGAL STATUTE to base a challenge before the Supreme Court on--an egregious mistake for the Founding Fathers not to clarify their meaning with a simple sentence to define their intent. Yeah, we can all argue or debate what they wrote and intended--and I'm CONVINCED they intended BOTH parents to be American citizens of any candidate born, it's not specifically defined in any legal document. THEY KNEW what the intent was in their own time period, 225 years later Congress has never addressed it and at least FOUR U.S. presidents who wouldn't meet "natural born" with 'two citizen parents', have served AFTER that first generation of citizens SINCE adoption of the Constitution. As long as Congress is willing to accept CITIZENSHIP as the qualifier for eligibility--WE can't challenge it in Court unless the STATES take up the challenge and it probably wouldn't get a hearing before the Court since some have already served as president that violated the principle we'd be challenging for. Remember--CONGRESS makes the laws, NOT "WE THE PEOPLE".
Cruz born in Canada from an American mother , father a Cuban .
By the Law of the Land : Born in the U.S.A. or U.S. Territories ( Canal Zone , Panama ; McCain ) , Military Bases , U.S. Vessels ; From Mother and Father both U.S. Citizens.
Canada never been U.S. Territory .
Rubio , Born in the U.S.A. from Cuban parents ; Rubio was 5 Years of age when his parents became Citizens ; Therefore he`s not qualified .
BUT--Obama was born to American mother, he's considered a citizen despite FACT--his mother SHOULD NOT have given him citizenship--SHE FAILED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS contained in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. The Supreme Court declined to accept ANY challenge to Obama's eligibility---under our current legal requirement--"American citizenship" is the simple requirement. Ted CRUZ IS an American CITIZEN--his mother met LEGAL requirements for him to receive AUTOMATIC citizenship under that Federal Act of 1952. The U.S. Supreme Court considers Obama to be an American citizen and eligible--for that same reason--they WILL NOT accept a challenge to either Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio's eligibility since BOTH are U.S. citizens. Right or wrong matters NOT to them--there is NO LEGAL STATUTE to define "natural born", hence it is in the hands of CONGRESS--the body of politicians WE elect to represent US and write laws of the land.
Can you show me a Birth Certificate that proves Cruz is a citizen of the United States? When Cruz was born there was no dual citizenship in Canada. When did he become a United States Citizen? I would love a date on that...
Dear God, you are stunningly ignorant and stuck on stupid! There have been 4 SCOTUS cases that indirectly address the NBC issue - again, I say - EDUCATE YOURSELF instead of continuing to look the fool!!!
Harry/JB Williams, hate to disagree with you HOWEVER, there is NO legal statute that DEFINES what "natural born" really is. We KNOW the Founding Fathers referred to both Blackstone's Common Law and Vattel's Nation of Laws when constructing our Constitution but at NO point, NO place in the U.S. Constitution did they explicitly spell out what the original intent was. Personally I feel, Rubio, Cruz, Bobby Jindal, and Obama are INELIGIBLE, period--no question about it. BUT--we've had numerous presidents who served that would NOT meet "natural born"--Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J Quincy Adams and Jackson were ALL British subjects when born in the U.S. to parents most of whom who were also British subjects. IF we allow them exemption for being from the FIRST generation of presidents after adoption of the Constitution--we can't overlook that James Buchanan and Chester Arthur were both born to Irish immigrant fathers, Woodrow Wilson was born to an Irish immigrant father AND Canadian mother and Herbert Hoover was born to German immigrant father AND Canadian mother. So, YOU can see--we have over 100 YEARS of "precedent" of American presidents who would NOT meet "natural born" IF that definition REQUIRED the father to be American citizen--OR if that requirement meant "TWO CITIZEN PARENTS". For MOST of man's existence, the FATHER'S CITIZENSHIP dictated that of his CHILD--as did the lineage of the family, inheritance of the family lineage and also the family name. THAT has only seen changes at beginning in the 20th century. Currently U.S. CITIZENSHIP determines the eligibility of the candidates since NO case concerning Obama's eligibility has been accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court--and I REFER YOU to the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act (part of Title 8 U.S. Code) which specifically DECLARES TED CRUZ TO BE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN: (1) IF he was born between December 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986 ( Cruz was born in 1970) (2) CRUZ's parents MUST be married (they were) (3) ONE parent MUST be a citizen of U.S. (MOTHER Eleanor was) (4) His mother lived at least TEN years in the U.S. before his birth (5) a MINIMUM of five years of those ten, lived in U.S. AFTER her 14th birthday. Under those REQUIREMENTS---Ted Cruz AUTOMATICALLY INHERITED HER U.S. CITIZENSHIP. We can all argue about the merits of "natural born"--but it has NEVER seen lawful definition with any legal statute. For that reason, the Supreme Court is likely to REJECT any challenge without an ACT of Congress and an Amendment to actually restrict the term to a precise meaning backed up by research from the Founding Fathers to provide clarity for THEIR beliefs. I'm convinced the Founding Fathers viewed 'dual citizenship' with extremely negative feelings and would WANT "two citizen parents" to define natural born--unfortunately their oversight has left a big hole for liberals/progressives/marxists--whatever delineation you want to call these mind numbed robots, to use for their own purpose. Don't forget, since 2003 BOTH parties have attempted to define or remove "natural born" at least EIGHT times from Article II, Section 1 the U.S. Constitution--conveniently forgetting only WE THE PEOPLE CAN AMEND THAT DOCUMENT!
You are exactly right, we never had any US law or precedent defining exact requirements to be a natural born citizen. Vattel's "law of nations" isn't law at all, it's philosophy, and he wasn't even an american, nor did he live here. Also quoting cases like Miner vs Happersett are pointless because it had nothing to do with defining a NBC and only mentioned the facts of the woman's birth, didn't state which of the facts were required to be NBC and even if it did, it wouldn't matter because the ruling was on her voting rights, not status as a citizen.
I do like your arguement just as I liked it in 2008 when we fought to get a court (any court) to enter a ruling and lost badly. The courts have all spoken, congress has spoken and we aren't going to win this anytime soon nor is it even in the top 1000 problems we face today and the time to have done this would have been before 2008, because now we do have both law and legal precedent. Congress settled the birth on us soil arguement and it wasn't challenged, so that is only an issue if it's the only way citizenship is obtained, and we have obama, a precedent of having a president with only one citizen parent and there is no way the supreme court is going to unseat obama in his last year, so the current defacto law is there are only two classes of citizenship. Those who were naturalized by the courts, and those who obtained citizenship at birth, and the courts now seem to believe the natural act of birth that grants you citizenship is what Natural Born means.
I know some here don't believe me and feel they an discern the intent of the founders, but so can the other 300 million people in america and there is no law stating your opinion is more valid than anyone else's. The courts and election people all see cruz and rubio as Natural Born and there is nothing we can do about it, or at least not anytime soon.
I also find the timing of all these posts suspect, not just here but dozens making the same argument we were all posting and sharing in 2008, it didn't work then and it won't work now so I suspect there is a hidden agenda to get cruz and rubio supporters to turn from who they think is best qualified and move to the huge elephant that this post is really about. If that's the point you're really trying to make here you really should just come out and say it and ask people to vote for your guy. I still haven't decided, but post like this won't sway me and now with the loss of justice scalia I'm far more worried about the 2nd amendment than anything else and of course who replaces scalia is a major part of that as well as whichever justice is next. Of all the candidates out there which ones have a proven track record of standing up against pressure from democrats and which ones have a record of appeasement? which ones have always been a strong conservative and which ones convert to conservatism just in time to run as president on the gop ticket?Which have a history of fighting and which have a history of negotiating? Both skills are important, but on the 2nd amendment and now the supreme court nomination we cannot negotiate at all, it's time to make obama and reids inflexibility look mild, then once we lock down the supreme court and make it clear we will only negotiate if they back off of gun control completely. Of those left in the running the only one's I'd consider voting for are cruz, carson and trump, all for very different reasons and there is no question which one I'd want picking the replacement for Justice Scalia. I also liked Rand Paul, but he's not in the picture anymore. We also need to consider which can beat the democrat nomination which is no longer clear if that will be hillary or bernie. I believe both will destroy us, but I think I'd rather be destroyed by a fool like sanders than the pure evil that is hillary. Afterall only a total fool would go full blown socialism on a country that is virtually bankrupt already, but he is so convinced in the boogie man who is hoarding all our money and he can stop them and money will flow to everyone.
We have a real shitstorm coming and the last thing we need to worry about is the lost battle over natural born citizen and the last thing we want to do is convince people to stay home and help a democrat get elected.
I have said for a couple of years.. We have to make sure we don't do the same thing the democrats did.. They would love that, therefore EVERYTHING obama has done to our great Country, would become REAL law, thanks to the Republicans..Otherwise, it could all become null and void....
I don't have to read this article. I have been saying for a couple of yrs Cruz and Rubio are not eligible to run! Yet the Tea Party folks are backing Cruz. We didn't stand out in the streets to commit the same crime as the Dem's have, did we?
Michelle--there is NO legal definition of "natural born" to restrict their qualification! Despite being mentioned in the Constitution--that was an egregious error by Founders NOT to specifically clarify their words. SEVEN of first presidents were ALL British subjects when born to mostly British citizen parents. IF you exempt them as first generation AFTER adoption of Constitution--James Buchanan and Chester Arthur had IRISH immigrant FATHERS. Woodrow Wilson had Irish immigrant father and Canadian mother, Herbert Hoover was born to German father and Canadian mother. THEY'VE ALREADY SERVED and NOT met "natural born" IF you mean it to be 'born to citizen PARENTS'! That's OVER 100 YEARS of 'precedent' already in U.S. history and NO legal challenge from either Congress or Federal Courts. TED CRUZ IS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN! The Immigration and Nationality ACT of 1952 gave him AUTOMATIC U.S. CITIZENSHIP from his mother IF she met the following obligations: (1) HE was born between Dec. 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986 (he was born in 1970) (2) PARENTS were MARRIED (yes) (3) ONE parent was a U.S. citizen (Mother Eleanor was) (4) SHE lived in the U.S. at least TEN years before his birth (5) SHE lived in U.S. minimum FIVE years after her 14th birthday. Ted Cruz IS an American citizen and the Court will NOT likely accept any challenge to his eligibility. One thing the Court WILL DO--they will NOT overturn their own decision and rejecting any challenge to Obama's eligibility demands the same for Cruz or Rubio.
Read this one, maybe it will help you.. Read it slowly, let it sink in..
Reasonable Conclusion in my book would be READING COMPREHENSION.. Why would there be two
phrases... NATURAL BORN CITIZEN VERSUS NATURALIZED CITIZEN....I think most of you
have been thinking about this so long, you wouldn't recognize the truth if it was hanging off your noses.
Think, for Gods Sake..