Lion of the Blogosphere

Cruz not eligible to be president

Trump finally brings up the issue that Cruz is not eligible to be President.

If you remember, conservatives thought that Obama wasn’t eligible to be president because they thought he might have been born in Kenya and his father was Kenyan and not an American citizen.

Well Cruz has the exact same problem, except unlike Obama he was really born in a foreign country and it’s not just wishful thinking.

Republicans, by allowing Cruz to get away with this, put themselves into a corner where liberals can call them racist and actually have a valid point.

* * *

Even if Obama’s mother had given birth in Kenya, the case against Cruz is even stronger than the case against Obama because Obama’s mother would have been just visiting Kenya, while Cruz’s mother was a permanent resident of Canada and remained so until Cruz was four years old. Cruz remained a citizen of Canada until two years ago.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

January 6, 2016 at 7:50 am

Posted in Politics

30 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I’m not sure why this didn’t become an issue earlier…


    January 6, 2016 at 7:55 am

  2. The place of birth had nothing to do with it. And the issue was raised by Hillary supporters not conservatives.

    The flames were fanned by the press refusing to report on any event of Obama’s past so naturally that caused suspicion. We never even knew of any women he ever dated until 2007.

    But if hippie Dunham had given up Barry’s US citizenship when the family moved (at the time must have seemed) permanently to the Philippians, then Barry would be ineligible.

    Lion of the Turambar

    January 6, 2016 at 8:10 am

    • Yes everyone conveniently forgets that it was the PUMA’s that first brought up the birther issue, not conservatives.

      Mike Street Station

      January 6, 2016 at 9:05 am

    • Indonesia, not the Philippines.

      Ripple Earthdevil

      January 6, 2016 at 12:11 pm

    • Good point- it was Indonesia. And it is entirely possible Barack became an Indonesian citizen just like he started using the name “Barry Soetoro” – he and his family plan to stay overseas permanently.

      In any event Trumps point is not operative.
      -BO had similar litigation and he conducted his presidency just fine
      – The courts ruled in BO’s case that no one had standing to for a court challenge to eligibility. If they didnt have standing for BO, they wouldn’t have standing for Cruz.

      Lion of the Turambar

      January 6, 2016 at 5:58 pm

  3. The law is well-established. You can be born anyway and still be an American as long as at least one parent is American. The fact that this issue keeps coming up merely shows how stupid and dishonest most political commentators are.

    bob sykes

    January 6, 2016 at 8:19 am

  4. The difference between a Cruz born in Canada and an Obama born in Kenya is that the former would have been born a citizen on account of his mother’s citizenship and the latter would not have been due to his mother’s age (and a law that has since been changed).


    January 6, 2016 at 8:22 am

    • But statutes of Congress have nothing to do with the Constitutional requirement. If anything, it demonstrates that mere U.S. citizenship of the mother doesn’t create a Constitutional right of citizenship.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 6, 2016 at 8:56 am

      • Statutes are taken to matter when it comes to being born a citizen or not, which informs “Natural Born Citizenship.” Generally speaking, it is considered that being a citizen at birth means being a NBC. Which could have been a problem for Obama had he not been a citizenship at birth. Not a problem for McCain, George Romney, and Cruz.


        January 6, 2016 at 9:26 am

      • Statutes are presumed valid until overturned. Someone’s got to challenge the statute in question first and win. I can’t imagine the remedy following victory would be retroactive application of the underlying contrary standard; e.g., repeal of citizenship previously granted. More likely the new standard would take effect going forward. So both Obama and Cruz are likely on strong footing no matter what.


        January 6, 2016 at 10:39 am

      • The point is not that either the old or new statute is Constitutionally invalid, but that the legal definition of a U.S. citizen is a lot broader than the more narrow Constitutional definition of “natural born” citizen.

        Could Congress pass a law which says that babies born in foreign countries are not automatically U.S. citizens? Yes, Congress could do that.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 6, 2016 at 11:01 am

      • Cruz was born a statute citizen. But not a natural born citizen, which is different.

        Andrew E.

        January 6, 2016 at 11:39 am

      • The definition of “Natural Born Citizen” is somewhat nebulous. It’s unclear there is any basis to believe the definition is any more narrow than the statutory definition of being born a citizen (ie they were not naturalized). Which Cruz was. Obama was, too, because he was born in Hawaii. Had he been born in Kenya it would have been trickier. But Cruz, GW Romney, and McCain seem pretty clear. They were citizens by virtue of their birth, not naturalized, and thus meet the definition of NBC by the most straightforward of definitions.


        January 6, 2016 at 11:54 am

      • “Could Congress pass a law which says that babies born in foreign countries are not automatically U.S. citizens? Yes, Congress could do that.”

        Yes. And in the interim between adoption and invalidation, assuming it is challenged, there will be babies born who are recognized as US citizens. Will the citizenship of those babies be terminated as a consequence of invalidation of the statute previously recognized or will the court only apply the new standard going forward so that only future foreign born babies are denied citizenship? I suspect the latter, but I’m not 100% sure.


        January 6, 2016 at 11:55 pm

      • Congress may not have the power to revoke citizenship once granted.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 6, 2016 at 11:59 pm

    • Yes, this is often overlooked. The idea is that, say you are an American who moves overseas as a child, grows up in that foreign place and eventually has a child with a local person. That child would not be a natural born citizen. Ms. Dunham was underage at the time she gave birth and would have fallen into the above situation.


      January 6, 2016 at 9:28 am

      • There are a million major flaws with the Obama was born in Kenya story, not the least of which being that neither parent had money at the time to pay for unnecessary expensive long distance flights plus the father was a major womanizer and had a gaggle of broads waiting for him in Kenya. Plus he was ambitious. As people on this site know, blacks aren’t particularly fond of whites and many purebreds don’t care for the half-breeds. He had nothing to gain by bringing his half-white kid to Kenya with him. And, of course, there’s the very strong evidence of the Hono Advertiser birth announcement not to mention first hand recollections of people at the time. The whole thing is and was nonsense.


        January 6, 2016 at 10:44 am

      • For the record, I don’t think Obama was born anywhere except Hawaii. The point is that if he had been born in Kenya, it would have mattered.


        January 6, 2016 at 3:03 pm

      • I think there’s still a small possibility he was born in Washington State.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 6, 2016 at 4:32 pm

  5. Everyone seems to think they’re right about the “Natural Born Citizen” thing, the truth is it wasn’t defined by the Constitution and is very debatable.

    I was taught in 7th grade (in the 90s) that natural born meant two american parents, born in the United States. So in the past, that seemed to be just assumed. Can anyone claiming otherwise find a pre-Obama source?


    January 6, 2016 at 12:09 pm

    • Indeed, we should try to find out what con-law professors thought about that phrase before Obama.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 6, 2016 at 12:26 pm

    • And now suddenly the Cruz supporters would have us believe born on foreign soil to 1 American parent is enough to be a natural born citizen. Please.

      Andrew E.

      January 6, 2016 at 12:36 pm

  6. This is confusing. My father is a native born American citizen, but I was born in Russia. Am I native born or not?


    January 6, 2016 at 2:03 pm

    • that doesn’t make sense. So your father was born in American and then immigrated *into* the Soviet Union?

      Otis the Sweaty

      January 6, 2016 at 5:14 pm

      • At the age of 4.


        January 10, 2016 at 8:20 pm

  7. This should be what lawyers call “immaterial.” The real issue is rule by Harvard. Cruz is disqualified because everything that’s screwed up about modern life was created by Harvard grads. As John Leboutilier put it, “Harvard Hates America.” Incidentally Lion, you should start reviewing old Perry Mason episodes. Hamilton Burger would always object, “Irrelevant, incompetent and immaterial!” LOL.

    Sid Storch

    January 6, 2016 at 2:47 pm

  8. Obama is a great example for why the presidency should be limited to natural born citizens. He’s clearly not a loyal American acting in the best interests of the country. But having had a president whose not a natural born citizen changes the definition and requirements by default. Because it will be very hard to walk it back and say that the president we’ve just had for the last 8 years was illegitimate. <<< double entendre!🙂


    January 6, 2016 at 3:21 pm

  9. “But if hippie Dunham had given up Barry’s US citizenship when the family moved (at the time must have seemed) permanently to [Indonesia], then Barry would be ineligible.”

    We don’t know this because Barry’s records are sealed, probably just because of that, *as are Ted Cruz’s*, by the way. For example, we don’t know if Ted’s mother renounced her American citizenship while in Canada for tax purposes, as Rafael Cruz said he (they?) did.

    This is complicated.


    January 6, 2016 at 3:40 pm

    • Whatever one might think about Barry’s mom, do you really think she was so short-sighted as to give up her son’s American citizenship in an age when America bestrode the world as a colossus and citizenship entitled one to benefits unimaginable in Indonesia? And her parents, his grandparents, were living in HI?

      Here’s what I know about Obama. I graduated from an Oahu high school the same year as Obama. I know several people who knew him well including some who’ve stayed in touch with him over the years. I have one good friend, a former roommate, who attended Punahou and met BO’s father when he visited the school back in ’71 when Barry was ten years old. BO lived from age 10-18 in HI attending Punahou School and nobody ever called him Barry Soetoro or ever questioned his citizenship certainly not Punahou School. He was always Barry Obama, an American kid. If people never call you Soetoro for eight of the eighteen years of your life it is unlikely that Soetoro is your name, especially when you go by your father’s name which is also the name on your birth certificate not to mention your driver’s license. Again, I know people who were his classmates for each of his eight years or more living in HI.

      In addition to that we have all of the generally known information including first hand testimony from many people who recall when he was born in Honolulu. The Honolulu Advertiser ran his birth announcement. He has a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii.

      This Indonesian and Kenyan stuff really is nonsense.


      January 7, 2016 at 1:52 am

  10. There are two separate issues:

    1. Is being born a citizen sufficient to be considered “natural born”.

    This is a complicated issue that would effect not just Cruz and Obama, but also past Presidents and contenders such as Chester A. Arthur, Barry Goldwater, and George Romney. To get to the bottom of that you have to suss out if “natural born citizen” had a firm and established definition in the late 18th Century and that that definition is what they intended. There seems to be some scholarly debate on that issue, and because it isn’t a slam dunk either way, it seems unlikely that Court would ever deny someone born an American the ability to run. The clearest proof of this is the fact that John McCain was allowed to run despite not even being born an American, let alone “Natural Born”. McCain wasn’t granted citizenship until he was nearly a year old, yet nobody raised a fuss.

    2. Was Cruz born a citizen.

    This question is not at all fuzzy. Cruz (unlike Obama if he had been born abroad) was born American on account of his American mother that (again, unlike Obama) qualified to pass citizenship via birth on to all of her children.

    Comparisons between Cruz and Obama are therefore ill founded. The debate with Cruz is the long running debate that has cropped up several times in the past as to whether being born a citizen was sufficient to be considered “natural born”. With Obama it went far beyond that because if Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, then not only would he not be “natural born”, he wouldn’t even be a citizen at all and should not just be disallowed to serve as President but deported as well.


    January 6, 2016 at 7:13 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: