Message to the Family Research Council on the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen”

WE MUST EDUCATE OUR FELLOW AMERICANS ON PRESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS

by Sharon Rondeau

(Oct. 4, 2014) — The Post & Email sent the following email to the Family Research Council (FRC), which recently reported that its straw poll, taken at its Values Voters Summit last weekend, resulted in Sen. Ted Cruz‘s taking of first place for presidential candidates in 2016.

I watched some of the video coverage of the FRC VVS with the Duggar family, Meriam Ibrahim, and Rep. Frank Wolf.  I reported aggressively on Meriam’s plight as she faced death in the Khartoum prison cell and gave birth shackled to the floor.

However, I am dismayed at your report that the straw poll you conducted resulted in Sen. Ted Cruz being the “frontrunner” for president in 2016, because constitutionally, he is not eligible.  Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution states that “no person, except a natural born Citizen…shall be eligible to the Office of President…”

Cruz was born in Canada to a U.S.-citizen mother and Cuban-citizen father who first became a Canadian citizen, then changed his citizenship to U.S. in 2004.  If you research “The Law of Nations” by Emmerich de Vattel, writings of the Founding Fathers such as David Ramsay, and a treatise by former Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long in 1916, you will find that the term “natural born Citizen” was commonly understood to mean “born in the country to U.S.-citizen parents.”  While members of Congress of both parties have attempted to obliterate the requirement, they know that a constitutional amendment would be required and would not pass the majority of the legislatures, as most Americans would not want a foreigner to run the country.  We have no better example of why the Framers insisted on none other than a “natural born Citizen” in the office of the presidency than Barack Hussein Obama, who favors radical Islamics over Christians and Jews; is importing hundreds of thousands of Muslims into the country who may intend us harm; and clearly advocates subservience of the U.S. to a system of global governance as evidenced by his chairing not once, but twice, of the United Nations Security Council.  He has also violated Article II, Section 2, clause 3 of the Constitution by appointing commissioners when the Senate was not in recess, as ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court, and committed numerous other egregious violations of his oath of office.  Does his interference in the Middle East, deference to the King of Saudi Arabia in kissing his ring, and deference to Muslim-Brotherhood-related groups not indicate foreign influence, the very thing the Founders wanted to avoid at all costs?

I am not contending that Cruz would become friendly with The Muslim Brotherhood or its affiliates as Obama has, but the possibility of foreign influence cannot be denied because of his birthplace and father’s citizenship at the time of his birth.  To promote an ineligible candidate is to do America greater harm than has already been done by Obama, whose origins and birthplace are as yet unknown.  For more information, please see:  http://www.mcsoccp.org/joomla/

Editor’s Note:  The RNC did not respond to our comments on Thursday left with both an intern and on their comment line regarding Cruz’s ineligibility to qualify as a “natural born Citizen.”

Gov. Bobby Jindal and Gov. Nikki Haley have also been suggested as presidential contenders, although both are said to have been born to foreign-citizen parents on U.S. soil.

Cruz’s press office also did not respond to our email asking if Cruz intended to release more documentation about his background, and specifically, whether or not he was born with dual Canadian-U.S. citizenship.  If he did not possess some type of U.S. citizenship, he was not eligible to serve as Texas solicitor general or U.S. Senator, a position he currently holds.  We also asked how Cruz could consider himself a “natural born Citizen” given his birth in Canada to a Cuban-citizen father.