Constitution Society Presidential Eligibility
Could Ted Cruz, born Dec. 22, 1970 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, be constitutionally ineligible for the presidency? If he were alive today, one of America's most distinguished presidential historians, J.J. Perling, would say yes.
We know that because he made that very judgement about another very distinguished American who was in the pipeline for the White House. He made it in the book, "The Presidents' Sons: The Prestige of Name in a Democracy," published in 1947 by The Odyssey Press, New York.
...
Now, here is the tale. It is just one example from history, the story of another, would be president, who was disqualified over the so called "birther issue." ...
He was born on the 4th of July [Ilíon: I don't know whether the quoted author has made a factual error or is speaking metaphorically, as in "Yankee Doodle"]. He graduated from Harvard University and studied law under Daniel Webster. His name was George Washington Adams. Both his father and grandfather were presidents of the United States.
Yet, according to the belief of legal experts at the time he could never be president himself. Why? He was born in Berlin, Germany while his father served in the American diplomatic corps as the U.S. minister to Prussia.
Keep in mind, both his mother and father were U.S. citizens. His father would soon become ambassador to the court of St. James. He would become secretary of state and not just any secretary of state, but the one who would craft and conceive of what became known as the Monroe Doctrine, the most enduring foreign policy position in American history.
H[is father] would later become the sixth president of the United States and his mother, Louisa Catherine Adams, would become one of our greatest first ladies.
John Quincy Adams ruled his son's life from a distance, sending letters ordering every moment of the day.
Louisa, the mother, took great solace in the fact that her firstborn, George, would not have the pressure of presidential expectations. He couldn't.
Their correspondence reveals their belief that the Constitution did not allow him to be president because of his birth in Germany.
...
Writes J.J. Perling, "George Washington Adams could never have been an occupant of the Presidential chair: the Constitution of the United States restricted that office to native born citizens, and George Washington Adams had been born in Germany."
So, I turns out that I was mistaken about how the Founders understood "natural born citizen"; that is, their understanding was far more restrictive than I had understood it to be. By the understanding of the Founders -- and after all, that *is* what matters with respect to understanding the US Constitution -- John McCain was *also* not a natural born US citizen, as I had previously believed.
1947, J.J. Perling, The Presidents' Sons: The Prestige of Name in a Democracy, Odyssey Press, New York — George Washington Adams could never have been an occupant of the Presidential chair: the Constitution of the United States restricted that office to native born citizens, and George Washington Adams had been born in Germany [on April 12, 1801 in Berlin, the son of John Quincy Adams, then on the diplomatic team to Prussia]. [Understanding of scholars at the time.]
And, even into the mid-20th Century, it was commonly understood, by everyone, that persons such as Barack Obama (and Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley and Marco Rubio) are not natural born US citizens -- when I was a child, I learned from my mother the core understanding that formed the basis of my rejection of Obama's, and now Cruz', (false) claim to be a natural born US citizen.
If the son and grandson of US presidents is not, and cannot be, a natural born US citizen because he was born in a foreign land -- while his father was serving as a minister in the US diplomatic corps -- then by what twisted logic does the bastard son of an alien (Obama) or the son of an alien born in a foreign land become a natural born US citizen? What? Because it's too much bother either to understand the truth of the matter or to uphold and enforce the US Constitution.
Have we not seen these past seven years what failure to uphold and enforce the US Constitution leads to?
6 comments:
That sounds pretty flaky.
Meaning?
I've never been able to wrap my head around why anyone should care where Cruz (or Obama, or anyone else) was born.
Edgestow,
The first question is: Can you "wrap your head around" why anyone would (and should) care that the people who wish to rule over us acknowledge themselves to be ruled by The Rules set down in the US Constitution, and actively seek to understand those rules are and actively seek never to misrepresent them, much less violate them?
This is the strongest case I've seen anyone make for this. Have you considered forwarding it to legalinsurrection which was looking for accounts like this the other day?
(he can still be on the supreme court can't he? that's where I think Cruz would do more good tbh)
Considering Cruz's *actions* -- he *knows* that he isn't a natural born US citizen, he *knows* that he is Constitutionally disqualified for either the presidency or the vice-presidency ... thus, he thinks that he is above the Constitution -- I don't want him on the supreme Court, either.
As for Legal Insurrection, I rarely visit it anymore, because after some change they made a couple of years ago, it doesn't cooperate with the browser on my computer.
Post a Comment