After spending many hours studying natural-born citizen legal cases, arguments and opinions, an interesting argument has been found for Marco Rubio. (previous article) A U.S. Supreme Court ruling should be made to clarify the legal issues surrounding natural born citizenship (The Constitutional requirement to be president of the United States of America). A requirement summarized by Breckinridge Long and published in the Chicago Legal News on 7 December 1916:
"Now if, by any possible construction, a person at the instant of birth, and for any period of time thereafter, owes, or may owe, allegiance to any sovereign but the United States, he is not a 'natural-born' citizen of the United States."This common definition has been upheld in several supreme court cases. We have further detailed the reasoning behind this constitutional requirement for presidency with regard to both Republicans and Democrats.
The argument supporting Marco Rubio goes like this: Since Cuba was freed from Spain in 1898 by the USA and was not fully independent until 1934, Marco Rubio is a Natural Born Citizen because his parents were born while the island was "Americanized." Lame Cherry Blog states it as:
Cuba gained formal independence in 1902, but these United States retained the right perpetually to intervene in Cuba, therefore making it and it's Citizens Americanized.The specific argument is that under the Platt Amendment (1901), America had rights to lands on Cuba including Guantanamo Bay and as such it was an American territory protected from Spain and other powers until 1934. Further, Rubio's parents, born during this period, fled Cuba for America as political refugees who cut all allegiance to Cuba.
It does not matter what John Kennedy pooched up at the Bay of Pigs or how the Rockefellers installed dope lord Castro for money laundering..........Cuba and Cubans are Americanized.
This is especially true in Marco Rubio's parents in Mario was born in 1927 and Oria born in 1931 were fully under the US protectorate status as much as Barack Hussein Obama sr. was under British Mandate status making him British.
There is one big problem with this excellent point. It is the Teller Amendment (1898).
The following resolutions were passed without opposition by both houses of Congress on April 20 1898. The fourth is the one referred to as The Teller Amendment, and is named after its author, Henry M. Teller, Senator of Colorado.A review of the Platt Amendment reveals that it does not claim any jurisdiction over Cuba. The goal of the Platt Amendment was to 'leave the government and control of the island of Cuba to its people.' There is no claim that Marco Rubio's parents were U.S. citizens. The best that can be argued for is an ethereal "Americanized" status.
[..]Fourth. That the United States hereby disclaims any disposition or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said Island except for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination, when that is accomplished, to leave the government and control of the Island to its people.
POST SCRIPT AND OTHER NOTESThis argument begs for Supreme Court clarification of the term Natural Born Citizen in this very specific case. I believe that Senator Rubio is assimilated to American culture, ideology and values and is a loyal American with no other allegiances. However, the U.S. Constitution does not rely on my opinion to ensure our hard won republic. Currently, if Marco Rubio is chosen as the vice presidential candidate, does that mean that children of Iraqi or Afghan refugees who made it to America could run for the highest office in the land?
Current TV commentators and other "experts" argue that anyone born on U.S. soil can be our President regardless of allegiance, ideology or culture. This is directly counter to John Jay's original argument to protect America from rich foreigners who would seek to install themselves as our rulers. My now studied opinion is that this "expert" argument is treasonous and directly assaults the U.S. Constitution and We The People who bestowed upon it the duty and obligation to protect our inalienable rights.
America has many enemies, both foreign and domestic, who will pour unlimited resources into our open democratic system to grab the office of President and then lay waste to our country. Individual patriotic candidates cannot match the power of anti-American nations and movements. Allowing the de facto removal of the Natural Born Citizen clause from Article II, Section I is lethal to our Republic because it leaves us exposed to the enemy battle plan of insurgency.
When beginning my look into natural-born citizenship, I drafted a post titled "Debunking Obama 'birthers'." It focused on some Snopes.com information about birth certificates and eligibility. When I began investigating and confirming the snopes information it proved to be biased, cherry-picked straw men arguments and completely false. It was appallingly wrong.
The natural-born definition exposed may rule me personally ineligible to be president. My father met my mother in a foreign country and married her. I was born many years later in northern Indiana per jus soli ("right of the soil"). As a patriotic American and a truth seeker these are the facts. This is despite the fact of my eligibility to the Sons of the American Revolution and Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War. It is clear that had my mother not been pro-American, had my father not been a patriotic American and if the culture around me had not immersed me in Americanism, I might have been indoctrinated with hate and ill-will towards America.
Most Americans do not know that the American electorate is the group who vets candidates, not the FBI, CIA or any other governmental agency. The Federal Election Commission is authorized by law to administer and seek compliance with campaign finance for federal candidates. Once first voted into federal office, security clearance is granted based upon vetting by the people. It is all up to We The People
If the SCOTUS ruled that anyone born on American soil can be president, our duty would be to amend the Constitution and restore the protection. The amendment is assuming our republic survives long enough for such action to be taken. My fear is that this information has come late. It may be our own president who someday shouts, "WE HAVE BURIED YOU! YOUR CHILDREN ARE COMMUNISTS!"