Thread: TED CRUZ CAMPAIGN HIT AGAIN, NEW 'BIRTHER' LAWSUIT FILED IN NEW YORK

Originally Posted by Judy

The Constitution trumps Immigration and Nationality Act passed by US Congress in 1952. It's almost comical how this continued repetition of INS law is used to argue for Cruz when it proves the argument against him. If citizenship is granted by a "law", then you are not a natural born citizen under Article II of the US Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution was original law passed in 1986. Amendments that were written after that date are law too. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 is law based on the U.S. Congresses interpretation and understanding of the U.S. Constitution.

There is Constitutional law which involves the US Constitution and federal court rulings.

There is statutory law which involves Congress and related regulations.

No statutory law or regulation changes, amends, alters or in any other manner modifies the Constitution.

I'm going to recommend the RNC request our candidates running on our Republican ballot for President and Vice President pledge they are natural born citizens defined as born in the USA to 2 US citizens. And if they don't conform with that, then we'll stop sending them any money.

SAVE AMERICA, VOTE NBC!

Exactly! Great post Newmexican.

The consensus is that Cruz will weather the storm, but his campaign has shown signs of wear and tear.

How long will these campaigns last if they come under fire like this in every state? This must consume enormous financial resources as well to pay off their legal teams. These campaigns can lose focus very easily if the stakes are raised contesting their eligibility.

Originally Posted by Newmexican

Not sure if you're making a good point or not. Would it be possible to get the rest of the story? Are his circumstances identical to Ted Cruz's?

There are some principle absurdities in allowing less than two US citizen parents for birth right citizenship. If a US citizen mother gets pregnant outside the US states and the father never sets foot on US soil, then by that bogus argument, the offspring is a US citizen. We might never know if the father is even illegible to enter the US legally, never mind if he is illegible to be a US citizen. Should a parent who is unqualified to be a US citizen be able to have offspring that actually are US citizens?

But forget the obvious problem and focus the worse part of the problem. Everyone is talking about Cruz and one parent being a US citizen. What about Rubio whose both parents are illegals. Is that right? Were they both illegals?

What is the point of wanting to be a US citizen at all, if parents won't even take the trouble themselves to become US citizens? How can a family raise good US citizens if they don't even care about US citizenship themselves?

Again I ask, how many people are sitting in government in the US who claim birthright citizenship based on fewer than both parents US citizens? Respond in this thread.

According to your arguments, they're identical. Born in a foreign country to a foreign father and American mother. Are the reasons behind the natural born citizen clause of Article II of the US Constitution becoming more clear to you?

Natural Born Citizen = Born in the USA to 2 US Citizens

SAVE AMERICA, VOTE NBC!

pkskyali wrote (excerpt):

There are some principle absurdities in allowing less than two US citizen parents for birth right citizenship. If a US citizen mother gets pregnant outside the US states and the father never sets foot on US soil, then by that bogus argument, the offspring is a US citizen. We might never know if the father is even illegible to enter the US legally, never mind if he is illegible to be a US citizen. Should a parent who is unqualified to be a US citizen be able to have offspring that actually are US citizens?

Your argument is not relevant to the current situation because Ted Cruz's father did actually step foot on American soil and was obviously eligible to do so because he was a legal resident for many years before Ted was born. Ted's father came to the U.S. on a student visa in 1957, attended the University of Texas, and received political asylum. He received a green card once his visa expired. Of course since then he has went on to become a naturalized U.S. citizen.

Originally Posted by Judy

According to your arguments, they're identical. Born in a foreign country to a foreign father and American mother. Are the reasons behind the natural born citizen clause of Article II of the US Constitution becoming more clear to you?

Natural Born Citizen = Born in the USA to 2 US Citizens

SAVE AMERICA, VOTE NBC!

Absolutely not correct. It takes more than just being born to an American mother in a foreign country to become a natural born citizen. There are more requirements involved. Please familiarize yourself with current law. To over simplify the issue does not change the facts.