If any are not aware, writing in the first person is something most individuals avoid especially when conveying news, facts or ideas. There are times for first person. This is one of those times.
As I peruse the news, the eligibility of Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal to hold the office of the presidency under the natural born citizen requirement has reared up to become a continual fiery issue. Some time back, I wrote a few opinion/editorials on both Cruz and Rubio regarding their inability to meet the natural born citizen requirement to be eligible to be president. These were published at the various sites I contribute, which received much backlash. When I say I received backlash, that is an understatement. Some were vicious. But, that is their prerogative.
As different commenters to these articles dazzled everyone with their stellar display of Supreme Court rulings, immigration and naturalization law, interpretation of the term “natural born citizen” and various amendment interpretations, I, as a simple person, relied on very few and only a couple of references. As these others razzle dazzled the other commenters, I stayed the course. Yet, I had good company.
While the references I used were simple, easy to read and understand, the simple fact escaped me that was so eloquently pointed out by my favorite, most trusted retired attorney, Publius Huldah. You’ll find a link to her site on the Resources and Information page. It was there all along. I knew it was there as it was as plain as the nose on my face. Then, I completely understood why the framers of the Constitution never defined it — they didn’t need to since you knew what it was. It was like the old saying, “you can’t see the forest for the trees.” Thanks to Publius, I cut down a few of those trees.
Before this nation was formed and a Congress ever established, the “natural born citizen” status was already there. It’s a Law of Nature. It is a status that is inherited just like the color of ones eyes or hair. Just as physical attributes are inherited from your parents through chromosomes, natural born citizen status is inherited from your parents — you are bestowed at birth with the citizenship your parents provide.
It is the same with individual rights. Rights come from God and predate any nation, government or law. So the rights we have as individuals — free speech, religion, the press, due process, property, no illegal search or seizure, etc. — were there before any government or Congress. Every individual born is born with those rights — government doesn’t bestow them to you. It is the same with natural born citizen.
You are born with a citizenship to a nation based upon the citizenship status of your parents. I have no document from the united States that declares me a natural born citizen since I did not have to go through the government to obtain any “legal” status. I was a natural born citizen by the citizenship I inherited from my parents, who inherited theirs from their parents, and on back for over 200 years.
In patriarchal societies, as most were when this nation was founded, it was the citizenship of the father that matter most, meaning the father determined more the inherited citizenship. This is basically known as coverture. One could say it is found in the Bible. When a man and woman marry, they become one — the one is the man since she takes his name and he is charged with head of the family. When the couple had children, the children inherited their status from the father.
Things have changed and times have changed, but the original intent of the Constitution of the united States has not. So, the citizenship of the father is more important than that of the mother under coveture, which was and still is in effect. There is no Supreme Court ruling, no act of Congress and no law that can change what one inherits from their parents or their father just like eye and hair color. And to change the original intent of the Constitution requires an amendment that three quarters of the States must ratify before it is added to or included in the Constitution.
Even the Constitution itself identifies different classes of citizenship — natural born citizen and citizen. If the terms were the same, there would be no need to distinguish between the two. The framers recognized a difference and included the more restrictive natural born citizen as an eligibility requirement for president. The difference in the two is quite simple. Natural born citizen is an inherited status and citizen is a legal status.
So, when looking at the status of the fathers of Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio at the time of their birth, it will determine what was inherited by the children. Rafael Cruz, Sr. was a citizen of Cuba at the time of Ted’s birth. The senior Rafael did not obtain US citizenship until 2005. Cruz’s mother was a US citizen who married the senior Rafael. They moved to Canada and later, Ted was born — in Canada.
Under the original intent of “natural born citizen” in the Constitution, Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen since his father retained Cuban citizenship at the time of Ted’s birth. Ted was born in Canada, not on US soil. So, Ted is not eligible since he did not inherit a natural born citizen status in the united States from his father. Canada provided citizenship to Ted because of his birth in that nation. The US did the same because of Ted’s mother, meaning Ted is a US citizen since he was born to one US citizen on foreign soil. However, Ted is not a natural born citizen.
With Marco Rubio, neither of his parents were citizens until years after he was born. They were citizens of Cuba. This means Marco Rubio was given legal status as a citizen by the government through his mother giving birth on US soil. Under natural law, Rubio is a citizen of Cuba. Under US law, Rubio holds the legal status of citizen.
The situation surrounding Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Soebarkah is the same as Ted Cruz. Hussein Soetoro has never been eligible to hold the office of president since he cannot meet the natural born citizen requirement under the original intent of the Constitution. Hussein Soetoro’s father, the one listed on his birth certificate, was a subject of the British Crown when he was born. It has been the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American public as the razzle dazzle of lawyer forked tongue speak and convoluting of meanings confused plenty in this nation. What’s even worse, these stupid, dumb-bums refused to listen to the arguments again in 2012 and elected the man again.
Almost eight years later and there are people complaining about Hussein Soetoro not being a natural born citizen yet go around yelling “Cruz 2016” or “Rubio — The Man.” They do the razzle dazzle routine just as individual did with Soetoro and take pride in their “showing up the simpletons” with their vast knowledge of Supreme Court rulings and immigration law. Neither have anything to do with a status that is inherited.
Granted, I have used the argument that both parents needed to be citizens of the united States to pass natural born citizenship status to their children. In this, I was wrong as the doctrine of coveture was one of which I was not aware. Now that I am, I can correct this thinking. Even with the wrong definition and thinking, I came up with the same answer — neither Rubio or Cruz are eligible; however, the right answer was based on the wrong intent. If you support the Constitution in its original intent, it is necessary at times to recognize your error, admit it, learn from it and move forward.
Thanks to Publius Huldah who put it all into perspective. Sometimes we can’t see the forest for the trees and even when it is plain as the nose on your face, you can’t really put it into the right words. Hopefully, others will let go a bit of pride and fear to recognize their faulty thinking.