SOLICITOR GENERAL ARGUMENT NOT A SUPREME COURT OPINION
by Sharon Rondeau
(Apr. 20, 2016) — On Sunday, The Post & Email published an article under this writer’s byline titled, “Breaking: Exclusive: Co-Author of Harvard Law Review Forum Article on Cruz Eligibility Argued in Favor of Contradictory Citizenship Law in 2010.”
While the title correctly reflects the article’s topic and premise, within the body of the article we incorrectly stated that the argument of then-Acting Solicitor General Neal Kumar Katyal that “The fact that Congress has enacted a law under which some foreign-born individuals acquire U.S. citizenship at birth by virtue of a parent’s citizenship does not mean that such individuals are not naturalized citizens for purposes of the Constitution” was issued by the U.S. Supreme Court.
We apologize for this error, pointed out to us by an astute reader, who we have thanked for alerting us to it.
The high court issued only a one-page affirmation of the lower court’s decision in the case, which dealt with a citizenship issue raised by Ruben Flores-Villar, who was found not to possess U.S. citizenship and ultimately deported after serving a 42-month prison term for having entered and re-entered the country as an illegal alien.
The Supreme Court upheld the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’s decision that Flores-Villar was not entitled to U.S. citizenship in accordance with the applicable immigration law.
The Post & Email was aware that the language came from the written argument made by Katyal and his assistants to the U.S. Supreme Court in November 2010, when the case was argued. As acting solicitor general, Katyal’s function was to engage, in his own words, in “overseeing appellate litigation on behalf of the United States, and with representing the United States in the Supreme Court…”
During the writing of the article on Sunday, The Post & Email confused Katyal’s submission to the court with the case’s outcome in the 25th paragraph, which begins, “On page 31 of 65 of the U.S. Supreme Court holding in Flores-Villar,…”
However, the clarification sheds further light on Katyal’s view of children born outside of the United States to a single U.S.-citizen parent in 2011. The article had attempted to highlight that Katyal, as co-author of an editorial published in the Harvard Law Review Forum in March 2015 making the case that Sen. Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada presumably to a U.S.-citizen mother and a known Cuban father, is eligible to the presidency as a “natural born Citizen.”
In his editorial, co-authored with former solicitor general under George W. Bush Paul Clement, Katyal argued that the “natural born Citizen” clause in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution applies to a child born anywhere in the world to a single U.S.-citizen parent.
In the final paragraph of their piece, published 12 days before Cruz declared himself a presidential candidate, Katyal and Clement wrote:
There are plenty of serious issues to debate in the upcoming presidential election cycle. The less time spent dealing with specious objections to candidate eligibility, the better. Fortunately, the Constitution is refreshingly clear on these eligibility issues.
However, lawsuits and ballot challenges to Cruz’s eligibility continue, and Cruz has not ever demonstrated that he was a U.S. “citizen at birth,” as he claims.
The other facts in the article are correct to the best of our knowledge and research. Rather than removing the original article, we will place a link to this correction for future readers.
I apologize, I got web site address wrong.
It should be: … revised_resolution.pdf
http://www.cactn.weebly.com/uploads/1/7/7/2/17726361/bills-114hres693ih_revised_resolution.pdf
Also see: http://www.cactn.weebly.com
http://www.northamericanlawcenter.org
P.S
Find your U.S. House Rep. contact info at:
http://www.house.gov
Here find your Rep. by state or their last name
Sharon, indeed would you expand info on this / do an article on this?
O/T but evidence of how usurper Obama has succeeded in fundamentally transforming America.
Back in January, to allay fears amongst the exploding number of ILLEGAL ALIENS in the county, Montgomery County, Maryland County Executive Isiah Leggett and the County Council issued a letter saying the county and its law enforcement won’t take part in helping the federal government deport illegal immigrants.
Leggett said the political leaders in Montgomery County wanted to send a message to illegal immigrants to not live in fear of the county government.
“Montgomery County does not support the policy of the federal government that this is a real concern nationally,” said Leggett. “But locally, we’re not going to enforce ICE’s mandates and we would hope that people understand that.”
“We are not involving ourselves in immigration enforcement and those types of activities — and we will not be changing this,” said Montgomery County Police Capt. Paul Starks.
County Executive Leggett tried his best to impose an 8% increase in county property taxes — FOUR TIMES THE LEGAL RATE INCREASE — in order to pay for new K-12 schools necessitated by the invasion of ILLEGAL ALIENS.
Out of the other side of his left-wing liberal mouth County Executive Leggett adamantly denies that Montgomery County is a sanctuary county.
For the better part of two years I’ve been trying to get the county to adopt the Honor and Remember Flag — http://www.honorandremember.org — as the county’s symbol recognizing those who gave all for our freedom and fly one 24/7/365 at the county’s new-in-2015 “Veterans Memorial Plaza.” To no avail because the county says it couldn’t afford to replace it when necessary.
Thanks Gary for your remarks. Part of the problem is We the People
are dumb and uneducated. Others, know the truth and do not defend
it.
However, others and myself are still in the fight. So, let’s all
charge.
“In his editorial, co-authored with former solicitor general under George W. Bush Paul Clement, Katyal argued that the “natural born Citizen” clause in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution applies to a child born anywhere in the world to a single U.S.-citizen parent.’
This is asinine…it is untrue…illogical…lacks common sense..is in obvious contradiction to the meaning and intent of the Framers…it is not the law and has no factual basis whatsoever. It is nothing more than devious and dishonest propaganda and blather to mislead the American voters and prop up the fraudulent candidacies of Cruz AND Obama.
How does Katyal square the fact that prior to 1934 under Ted Cruz’s identical 1970 birth circumstances he could not have even been an American citizen PERIOD. Only the father could transmit her American citizenship before 1934 and that was pursuant to residency requirements. The Constitution has not since changed only the liberalization of the NATURALIZATION laws on the books.
How does Katyal square the repeated and illegal efforts by Congress to change the NBC requirement in the 2000’s? Cruz is a damn fraud and he knows it.
Does it really make sense that any of the DOZENS of princes and princesses born to American women overseas the past 200 years can then come to America, establish residency and run to be POTUS and commander-in-chief of the US military? Anybody who hangs their hat on the Katyal explanation is a certifiable IGNORAMUS or cares little or nothing about the founding principles and the US Constitution!