Posted on 08/19/2013 6:17:17 PM PDT by kristinn
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) announced Monday evening that he will renounce his Canadian citizenship, less than 24 hours after a newspaper pointed out that the Canadian-born senator likely maintains dual citizenship.
“Now the Dallas Morning News says that I may technically have dual citizenship,” Cruz said in a statement. “Assuming that is true, then sure, I will renounce any Canadian citizenship. Nothing against Canada, but I’m an American by birth and as a U.S. senator; I believe I should be only an American.”
SNIP
“Because I was a U.S. citizen at birth, because I left Calgary when I was 4 and have lived my entire life since then in the U.S., and because I have never taken affirmative steps to claim Canadian citizenship, I assumed that was the end of the matter,” Cruz said.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
a single mother required certain qualifications
_____________________________________________
Jeffie the mother bit for Obama isnt whether of not his mother was married..
Its whether she was old enough to pass on to him her US cxitizenship if he wasnt boen in the US
the mother must be at least 5 years in the us passed the age of 14 meani g she must be at least 19 when the baby is born if he/she is born overseas..
Sinc e Obama is said to have been born on US soil..Hawaii after 1959... that concern is moot...
Meanwhile ted Cruz was not born in the US..
His mother was 19+ so she was able to pass on her American citizenship to him..
But he is not NBC...
His father was not a US citizen when he was born...
If Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, then Ted Cruz has less status for eligibility for POTUS than Obama...
I would be thrilled if Ted had been born in the US because then he would be equal in eligibility with Obama
It seems Obama has set the presdence for one American parent ...even the mother...
However, there is still ther serious problem of those sealed records of Obama’s ...
Which has been shown since to mean citzens in the plural that are so born and not necessarily parents.
_______________________________________
so Jeffie after being precise in other areas of the Constitution, Madison was sloppy when it came to protecting the integrity of future leadership of the new country ???
That would disqualify my brother-in-law.
“”””....And the children of citizens of the United States...”””
The key word here is Citizins (Plural)... ie. Offspring of both a citizen mother and a citizen father.
This is why back in 1988 when a resolution regarding the eligibility of Senator John McCain was introduced in the Senate, you can read these quotes.....
Senator Leahy>>>>>
“Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen,” .
“I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate.”
Senator Chertoff>>>>
“My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,”
Conclusion.... A person must be born of 2 parent citizens to be considered a Natural Born Citizen.
“”””No offence, but at this point, take a guy from Mars if he’s an actual conservative and could get elected.””””
Offence taken...... Any honest, principled constitutional conservative from Mars, Canada or Kenya, who does not have two USA citizen parents, would never accept the nomination for President. WHY? because they love this country and they know they ARE NOT ELIGIBLE!!!
he has been in his seat for a whole 8 months)
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Actually more like seven.
W R O N G
McCain>>> Two 2 US citizen parents born in Canal Zone = Natural Born Citizen
Cruz >>> One us citizen parent and one non citizen parent born on Canadian soil = dual citizenship.
You can not be both a dual citizen and Natural Born Citizen at the same time. And since NBC status is determined at birth. Renouncing citizenship later in life can not make one a natural Born Citizen retroactively.
The whole idea of the Natural Born requirement was to avoid any possibility of dual loyalties. Now, I do believe that Cruz is a loyal American But allowing him to ignore the NBC requirement will open the door to others who will not share his sentiments.
You’re talking to someone that knows more on the subject than you. I’ve already posted as have others the statutes and their requirements numerous times.
Natural Born Citizen is not in the immigration statutes because it is a stricter form of ‘Citizen at Birth category’ than a general Citizen at Birth category and because it has to do with presidential eligibility and not immigration law. In other words it is a subset but a stricter smaller subset that exists only for presidential eligibility. It is not explicit in the immigration statutes because the law behind those statutes was addressing immigration and naturalization and not presidential eligibility. I repeat myself for those have trouble understanding.
Presidential eligibility is addressed in the Constitution and contrary to what others say the definition of Natural Born Citizen was well known to the framers.
For purposes of determining presidential eligibility three categories of citizenship are considered of which only one is acceptable.
Presidential Elgibility:
1. Natural Born Citizen - ACCEPTABLE
2. Citizen by Birth - NOT GENERALLY ACCEPTABLE
3. Naturalized Citizen - NOT ACCEPTABLE
Every Natural Born Citizen is a Citizen by Birth but not every Citizen by Birth is a Natural Born Citizen.
The Natural Born Citizen group is a strict subset of Citizen by Birth but not the other way around.
Nope. George Washington says you are wrong by the definition of “natural born citizen” used in the Naturalization Act of 1790.
Two kinds:
(1) at birth
(2) naturalized
And current law continues that formulation.
“Cruz wins the republican nomination and the general election.”
Yes, I fear your scenario as well. I was called a cassandra for castigating the split between Santorum and Gingrich, which would lead to a Romney nominee unless Gingrich supporters moved to Santorum. They did not.
Gingrich was never going to be president - he just had too much baggage from before. He was good for Romney, and by extension - Obama.
He can’t run,He is not born in the USA. You have to be born in the USA— not Canada. Legal experts all agree. He is a wonderful man and will make a fine attorney General for President Paul.
ALL of my cynicism comes from the idea that we need The Facebook-Popular candidate.
Presidential politics isn’t designed to be a popularity contest or a beauty pageant. It is incumbent upon We The People to select constitution respecting men and women to represent us, and then limit those to their constitutionally defined powers, either through peaceful petitioning, or, as a last resort, through the means our forefathers used.
I admire Ted Cruz. I believe he is a patriot, and a true American; but he isn’t eligible to be president, IMO.
It would be better if he remains in the Senate while WE THE PEOPLE send as many more like him as we can find, to reinforce his position.
The cost of being a nation of laws, is abiding by them even when it’s not in our favor to do so.
My $.02
Ah, I see you made it to this thread after all. I just sent you this link in an FRmail.
The only thing I will contribute to this thread is this:
A child born of two US Citizen parents on American soil is a NBC. No doubt.
Any deviation from the above presents problems, if there are problems there must be doubts, ergo the discussion on this thread.
JMHO
IIRC, that was repealed in 1795
Does not your post #277 refer to the ***1952** Naturalization Act?
Now you want to talk about the very first act of Congress in 1790 which addressed citizenship requirements and was the only naturalization act of Congress that made mention of natural born citizen?
You’re playing games now?
Get Lost!
For those reading:
The 1790 Naturalization Act was written for Americans on the high seas or in transit and it referred the Natural Born Citizen requirement as observed for a child born to citizen parents (”Second Generation Citizens”) who were domiciled in the United States or its territories or possessions.
The question was what was the citizenship status of a child born to US citizen parents overseas on the sea?
The answer was the child is natural born if born to citizen parents who had residence in the United States or its territories or possessions. The word used today is domicile.
The issue was raised again under President Madison who confirmed that a relatively short time on a sea voyage or a mission abroad did not disqualify a child born abroad of citizens from consideration as natural born.
This keeps getting repeated.
Suppose congress creates a law that naturalizes at birth everyone born in Cuba. Because the law takes effect at birth, it isn't naturalization?
Really?
Look up the act which grants citizenship at birth to the child of a single American Parent. Do you not see the word "naturalization" displayed prominently in it?
I have studied this stuff now for... how long? I don't even know.
I know the Constitution, history and the law backwards, forwards and sideways on the meaning of natural born citizen by now. And I can tell you without the slightest qualification that all of the claims that it takes both birth on US soil plus citizen parents to be a natural born citizen are complete bullsh*t.
It's just like the crowds of people who can get no other idea in their head than that George Zimmerman just hunted Trayvon Martin down and murdered him in cold blood. It is exactly the same: A completely false narrative that people wanted to believe, so they do.
In both instances the people who want to believe the bullsh*t listen to the Al Sharptons and the DiogenesLamps, and simply ignore or write off all the evidence that contradicts them, which in both cases is virtually all of it.
I quoted the poster word for word.
If it was created by the power of congress, it's naturalization.
I’m talking about the use of the expression “natural born citizen”. It was used by the founding Congress 3 years after the ratification of the Constitution, and it was signed by George Washington, who presided over the Constitutional Convention that gave us our Constitution.
THEY used the expression “natural born citizen” to describe the child born overseas to US citizens.
It’s irrefutable. It shows their USE of the expression “natural born citizen” included bloodline citizens, those born overseas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.