Sen. Ted Cruz Is a Naturalized Citizen, not a Natural Born Citizen

London Telegraph ^ | Jnuary 30th, 2016 | reasonmclucus

[FreedBird]

how did he go from Barry to Barack Hussein? Something is weird about just that fact.

[Flintlock]

Now, can we get to................

............what the hell is SITTING THERE AT 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE????????????????????????????

[fireman15]

He was both a natural-born Canadian subject and a natural-born US citizen. Canada and the US both allow dual citizenship. He formally rescinded his Canadian citizenship in 2014. End of story.

No, this is controversial with qualified experts on coming down on both sides. You or I could not claim to know how this would turn out if it were litigated. So it is not the end of the story. The end of the story will be when Cruz wins the election and the Democrat he ran against files a lawsuit and it ends up in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court would decide the end of the story.

[jz638]

... according to a British newspaper.

Do any of the “Cruz is not a natural born citizen” crowd on this site think they are changing any minds by posting additional articles?

Do I think that by posting this reply that they’ll stop and this site will return to discussing actual issues facing the nation’s future?

[Vendome]

Funny.

This screed comes from London and don’t understand Engrish...much less case law or Constitutuional law or international law, etc...

[heights]

I’m not sure he’s an earthling.

[Cboldt]

Just a few cases here. Wong Kim Ark is pretty dense. Rogers v. Bellei is parallel with the Cruz case, at the time of birth (set aside that Bellei was stripped of citizenship, and note that all 9 justices see Bellei as naturalized at birth). The blockquote is from Thomas v. Lynch, decided about half a year ago.

Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815 (1971)
Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649 (1898)
Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420 (1998)
Thomas v. Lynch - 5th Circuit - August 7, 2015 - 14-60297

"There are two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization." Bustamante-Barrera v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 388, 394 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). "Within the former category, the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees that every person `born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization.'" Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420, 423-24 (1998) (quoting United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702 (1898)). "Persons not born in the United States acquire citizenship by birth only as provided by Acts of Congress." Id.

[Cyman]

Hey London, stick with something you know like spotted dick.

[Third Person]

Cruz is a natural-born weasel

[Daniel Ramsey]

Today its Britain, tomorrow its Italy, Spain, Netherlands, Greece.......

[AFret.]

Rubio is not eligible, either.
His parents were foreign nationals.

Natural born citizen means one is NATURALLY a US citizen, according to Natural Law and the Law of Nations, because one cannot be anything else because one is born here of citizen parents.
_________________________________________________________

Exactly right..Rubio is the poster boy for anchor babies.

Mom and Dad waded ashore in Florida, and delivered young Marco. He became a citizen by virtue of being “Born of the Soil”...but Mom and Dad were still Cuban citizens until 4 years after the future Presidential candidate was born.

He can, by virtue of being a citizen, be elected to the senate..but is not qualified for the top job because he was not the product of “Two citizen Parents”...and therefore, is not NBC.

[driftdiver]

Uh no

[Aria]

He’s a natural born Canadian citizen. The founders didn’t want a POTUS with divided loyalties - which of course proves how right they were in predicting the problems with someone with only one citizen parent such as Barack Hussein Obama, citizen of the world, who at least managed to produce sort of a United States birth certificate.

[Lurkinanloomin]

Clarence Thomas admitted that they ducked the Obama ineligibilty.
If forced to decide, they will uphold Precedent Obama and embrace the new definition of “born a citizen”, even though they know it means born here of citizen parents excluding the possiblity of any divided loyalty or allegiance.
If one can be anything else at birth, one cannot be a natural born citizen.
The new definition of simply being born a citizen, even if only one one’s mother’s side, makes every anchor baby with no loyalty to America and Winston Chrurchill eligible.

[AFret.]

A very good legal case can be made that natural born citizen = citizen from birth.

---

I’ll finish your sentence for you.....”=citizen from birth ..of two citizen parents, born of the soil”.

Now, how does that read?

[Ciexyz]

Rubio is eligible because he was born here. Leave Rubio out of this debate.

[Enlightened1]

See Cruz supporters. The Establishment GOP is using you to get to Trump.

I can bet you as sure as the Sun will come up tomorrow that GOPe along with the DNC will shop a federal judge to disqualify Cruz.

DON’T FALL FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT TRAP!

[AnalogReigns]

These aren’t definitive. The USSC has not ruled on it...

[sourcery]

Naturalization requires no process. It just requires a law declaring you to be citizen. A process is an option that the lawmakers may or may not choose to require.

It’s quite clear that George Washington—for example—was not a natural born citizen: He was born on British soil. He became a citizen by operation of a law, not by birth, nor by any formal “naturalization process.” But he was a naturalized citizen, nevertheless. That’s why the Constitution makes an exception regarding Presidential eligibility with respect to those who were citizens as of the moment the Constitution was ratified: No one age 35 or older was a natural born citizen in 1789.

[Springfield Reformer]

Nguyen v INS (2001) appears to recognize two categories, citizen at birth, and citizen due to some event that comes after birth, although said event may be applied retroactively to the time of birth. The latter category is naturalization. But where no action is required after birth to secure citizenship, that is arguably a "natural born citizen" scenario.  

More specifically, in the Nguyen case, the father did not show sufficient connectedness to the child for years after the child was born to provide a basis for a retroactive transfer of citizenship to the child (child not naturalized). The mother was an alien, and could not transfer citizenship at birth (child not born directly into citizenship).  The key thing in Nguyen is that it recognizes naturalization as requiring some event after birth to secure citizenship.  Birth that requires no such post-natal event is NOT naturalization.  Is there any other non-naturalized category besides "natural born?" I am not aware of any.

Peace,

SR